Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

After watching the Jags today, how did we lose to them?


Recommended Posts

1) Divisional games are always unpredictable the 5-1 Titans barely beat the 1-6 Texans. 2) First game of the season and due to covid barely any training camp and no preseason games. 3) Colts haven't won a game in Jacksonville since 2014 crazy stat I looked it up lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any given Sunday. Especially in week 1. Especially against a divisional foe. Especially when one team has recent historical struggles in opening week. Especially when one team hasn't won at the other team's home stadium in over half a decade.

1 hour ago, coltsfansince65 said:

They looked pretty awful today against the Chargers. Their only win is against the Colts.

 

On another note.........Also after today's games I think I could get onboard with those hoping for Matthew Stafford to wear the shoe.

Also the Bears only loss is against the Colts. Keep the same energy.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coltsfansince65 said:

They looked pretty awful today against the Chargers. Their only win is against the Colts.

 

On another note.........Also after today's games I think I could get onboard with those hoping for Matthew Stafford to wear the shoe.

Menshew has one great game a year, just happened to be against us this year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wish we hadn't played the Jags week 1. You don't want to play the bad teams week 1 because every team in the NFL is undefeated, so we wasted a bad team game on some undefeated shmucks who thought they were tough SOB's.

 

And yea, it hurt us that none of the teams had any preseason as it narrows the skill-gap between a good team who needs practice vs. a bad team who would suck at practice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GoColts8818 said:

Soft zone defense all game which has yet to stop anyone all year.

And.... ding ding ding we have a winner. Pitiful job by Eberflus. Let’s pray they learned something from this as well as subsequent games and have ditched that anemic And vanilla D. 

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

And.... ding ding ding we have a winner. Pitiful job by Eberflus. Let’s pray they learned something from this as well as subsequent games and have ditched that anemic And vanilla D. 

I hope so but I don’t think the coaches have.  No matter how much it gets shredded they keep trying to go back to it.  The good news is they are getting faster at getting out of it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shafty138 said:

I mean, there were so.e changes, but that same d stopped most everyone since....

Watch the first half of the browns game and the first quarter of the bengals game when they went back to the soft zone.  They then got out of it and played like they did vs other teams and what do you know the defense got better.

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

Great question! But I think it had a lot to do with coaching.

So the coaches threw the interceptions? 

WE dominated that game. Take the two picks out and we win. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

So the coaches threw the interceptions? 

WE dominated that game. Take the two picks out and we win. 

Same can be said for the dropped passes, missed field goal, and bad play call on 4th & 1 from inside the 5.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Lancer1 said:

Same can be said for the dropped passes, missed field goal, and bad play call on 4th & 1 from inside the 5.

The only thing that can be directly attributed to the coaching staff is the bad play calling

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Soft zone defense all game which has yet to stop anyone all year.

 

3 hours ago, aaron11 said:

i'll say it was the interceptions.  the colts dominated most stats besides completion %

 

^I'll say you're both right.. along with not converting a 4th and short inside Jax's 10.  

 

The Jags didn't really beat us that game, we beat ourselves... but as recent trends go, we stink against JAX in JAX and we stink at season openers... hopefully that'll change, soon.

 

Also, losing Mack early in that game probably had a lot to do with our offensive game plan (IMO)... we threw 46 times and ran 22 - Mack was having a lot of success running, we struggled after he went down.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CurBeatElite said:

 

 

^I'll say you're both right.. along with not converting a 4th and short inside Jax's 10.  

 

The Jags didn't really beat us that game, we beat ourselves... but as recent trends go, we stink against JAX in JAX and we stink at season openers... hopefully that'll change, soon.

 

Also, losing Mack early in that game probably had a lot to do with our offensive game plan (IMO)... we threw 46 times and ran 22 - Mack was having a lot of success running, we struggled after he went down.

Look no further OP, this is the answer, along with it being the first week of the season and weird things happen in week 1 league-wide.

The Jags almost always play us close too, one of those things. We absolutely should beat them when we next play in week 17, but who knows really.....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look...   even going back to the Manning days, the jags always play the Colts like its their SB. 

 

I cant explain it any more than you can, but its like Colts vs Jags is what they live for. Because we seem to be the only team they actually care about. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

So the coaches threw the interceptions? 

WE dominated that game. Take the two picks out and we win. 

I think letting Minshew go 19/20 3 TDs was the bigger problem.

 

Heck, the 2nd interception didn't actually change the game.  We went from 4 down to 7 down.  Needed a TD either way, and might have gotten it if TY didn't get the dropsies.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, game plan on both sides of the ball.

 

Jax is bad vs the run, yet we tossed it all over the yard in the first game with a new QB without a preseason.

 

On D, we played extremely soft zone allowing Minshew to look like a surgeon. 

 

Sure the INTs stunk, but we should have been running it down their throats from the start. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Soft zone defense all game which has yet to stop anyone all year.

 

The same zone showed up early in the Browns and Bengals game and led to deficits, we overcame one and did not with the other.

 

Stafford will pick it apart if we play that zone. The Lions are a scrappy team after their bye week, have changed up a few things that have kept them very competitive.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DontEverGiveUp said:

I think letting Minshew go 19/20 3 TDs was the bigger problem.

 

disagree, the colts had a lot more yards than them with a high completion % them selves.  phil had 363 yards compared to minshews 170.  phil had almost 80% completions himself 

 

turnovers are what actually killed us, missed out on a lot of points directly because of interceptions.  sorry but you are wrong when you say the second one didnt change the game, that could have been 7 for us

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Indianapolis Colts: 

Lose to the Jags, who have lost to everyone else. 

Beat the Bears, who have defeated everyone. 

 

The Bears beat the Buccaneers and Tom Brady, who destroyed Aaron Rogers and the Packers and the Raiders.

 

The Raiders smoked the Chiefs.

 

happy dance GIF

 

Nothing makes sense in this world. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

disagree, the colts had a lot more yards than them with a high completion % them selves.  phil had 363 yards compared to minshews 170.  phil had almost 80% completions himself 

 

turnovers are what actually killed us, missed out on a lot of points directly because of interceptions.  sorry but you are wrong when you say the second one didnt change the game, that could have been 7 for us

 

 

Faulty logic.

 

You are assuming that the only alternative to an INT is a TD.  If Rivers just threw an incompletion instead of the INT, would you be blaming that incompletion for the loss?

 

Our defense was embarrassingly bad in week 1, and it was the main reason we lost, though there were a long list of contributing factors.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, DontEverGiveUp said:

Faulty logic.

 

You are assuming that the only alternative to an INT is a TD.  If Rivers just threw an incompletion instead of the INT, would you be blaming that incompletion for the loss?

 

Our defense was embarrassingly bad in week 1, and it was the main reason we lost, though there were a long list of contributing factors.

you are making the assumption that they would not score there, so who are you to say im the one assuming the wrong thing?  you said it didnt change the game when both picks could have been points for us instead

 

we had more than double their yardage. the defense bent but didnt let them do much at all after the catch, and their completions were mostly short 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DontEverGiveUp said:

I think letting Minshew go 19/20 3 TDs was the bigger problem.

 

Heck, the 2nd interception didn't actually change the game.  We went from 4 down to 7 down.  Needed a TD either way, and might have gotten it if TY didn't get the dropsies.

Minshew completing 19 of his 20 passes was a   huge part of it.   I'd say 45%

Reich play-calling would be 25% responsible for the loss.   

Rivers INT's were 20% responsible for the loss.

10% would be others (missed field goal, Hilton drops ect.).

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

It's kind of self explanatory. 

First game of the season.

No pre season

Not enough OTAs

Jackonsville had the same thing. No pre season, Not enough OTA's, first game of the season and they played well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, BigO said:

Jackonsville had the same thing. No pre season, Not enough OTA's, first game of the season and they played well.

Well there were 16 teams that week that didn't play well and the Colts were one of them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2020 at 8:21 PM, GoColts8818 said:

Soft zone defense all game which has yet to stop anyone all year.

 

Which explains why the Colts are leading the league in interceptions right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J@son said:

 

Which explains why the Colts are leading the league in interceptions right?

And the vast majority of those picks have come when they have gotten out of the soft zone defense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2020 at 7:03 PM, coltsfansince65 said:

They looked pretty awful today against the Chargers. Their only win is against the Colts.

 

On another note.........Also after today's games I think I could get onboard with those hoping for Matthew Stafford to wear the shoe.

BTW, why in the world did you subject yourself to watching the Jags?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nickster said:

BTW, why in the world did you subject yourself to watching the Jags?

Colts were on a bye & I left Minshew in my FF lineup even though reports were saying he might be benched. I wanted to monitor

his progress or lack thereof. I may keep him around a little longer.

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

    • This may be the best football interview I have ever seen.  Must see for Colts, Packers or any other football fan!   Rodgers is the most candid I've seen and he's really funny.      
    • Correct. And we need to win that game because if we lose, it is highly unlikely we win the last 5, but I think it is likely they win at least 3 since they play Hou. Jax and a floundering Det.  And they may even be favored against Cle.  That leaves GB for them to upset to sweep into the playoffs and could make it very tough for us to get in at all with our tie breaker status.  This is the more important than any further game this season.  Win and our path to the playoffs is so much more wide open.  But we will still likely need to win at least 3 games to get in unless TN craters somehow.  Those tiebreakers are really going to challenge us in wildcard scenarios.    I could see Hou winning one against us, they usually do and they are on a major upswing.  Their offense is no joke and they do not depend at all on the run so our run defense is less effective obviously.  Pitt and the Raiders are also no joke and both games are away.  This is a critical one if we hope to win the division. If we lose, finishing 9-7 is realistically still in play and I don't see TN losing 3 out of 5.  In fact, I don't see them losing more than 2 of 5.  If we win they'll likely have to win 4 of 5 or sweep to catch us for the division.  I called the Raiders game as being key to make the playoffs and go 10-6 before the season started. With a loss, the desperate WC tie breaker situation, that is especially true.  It's possible for a 10-6 team to miss the playoffs even with the extra team.  Cleveland will almost surely get 10 wins with their easy finish.  Baltimore is also likely.  (Their divisional matchups are really favorable this time around).  Then again maybe we'll sweep the season and get the #1 seed.  Pitt still has to play 5 current playoff teams in their final 6 and KC has to play 3.     Just speculation as always, but that is the fun of a football message board.  Go Colts!
    • ^This^   Another way to look at it is this:  considering the production that Ballard is getting out of his draft picks while they're still on their rookie contracts... why over-spend on re-signing anybody?   If Ballard can continue hitting on draft picks the way he has, then it's almost better to just keep accumulating draft picks, draft well, and let the young guys go out and make plays.   Let other teams over-spend on proven talent while Indy keeps providing an opportunity for young hungry players to prove their talent.   Save the money for slam-dunk moves like Buckner.
    • I bet you are 1000% wrong.   Nelson is the biggest name in the league at G, and it's not even close.  A "bad" Nelson (that gets called for ticky-tack holds that happen on every single NFL play) is still better than 90% of the guards in the NFL.   Your hot-take posts are getting very tiresome.  
    • They have contributed as much their rookie year as the entire group maybe by end of the season, but I doubt there's even a tiny chance of 2 all pros. Even 1 is a major stretch.  I am not sure we have any all pro's on the team since the most deserving one is Buckner (who I count as our first round pick in every way) has impact but no stats to wow anyone not intimately aware of his impact. If he misses this game we may painfully see how valuable.  But their collective impact has certainly added up. 4 starters and 2 solid special teamers in a so far playoff level team is quite a haul for any draft pick class in history.  It is at least adjacent to 2018, unless you don't count Buckner in any way.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...