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

    • Nail biter for several reasons. Pre-game beers may be needed for the nerves.
    • If I had to guess, Rivers will be back on the books.
    • Typically to be a HOFer you have to be dominant for ~a decade.  Leonard and Q are ~2.5 years into their careers (about a quarter of the way there).  Leonard has not played 16 games in a season yet, which is somewhat concerning to me.  This year, while he and Q both look very good, I don't think either is deserving of an all-pro award.     So yes, very impressive that Q has been 1st team all-pro 2x and Leonard has a 1st and 2nd team all-pro under his belt.  That is very rare (Gale Sayers and Dick Butkus are the only other 2 teammates who made 1st team all-pro as rookies).  In no way am I knocking Q or Leonard, they're both critical pieces to this team and at the elite level in the NFL at their respective positions.  Labeling them as HOFers this early into their career is a bit of a stretch, though -- let's give them another 3.5-4 years to see if they're still healthy and performing at an all-pro level.  They're certainly off to a good start, but there are a lot of players who have made 2 all-pro teams in their career and are not HOFers (heck, LeRoy Butler was a 4x 1st-team all-pro and has been eligible for HOF induction for ~15 years and isn't in, Steve Wisniewski was 2x 1st team, 6x 2nd team and not in, etc.).  Also, the vast majority of HOFers were not first team all-pro as rookies.  These 2020 rookies are in perhaps the strangest year of the modern era, with limited training camps, no pre-season games, missing games due to COVID (see Taylor), etc.... Pittman, Taylor, Blackmon have all shown flashes of excellence and all have had their own obstacles on top of a weird off-season as rookies (Blackmon coming off injury getting thrown into starting line-up due to HOoker going down, Taylor having Mack go down and now missing a game on the COVID list, and Pittman with compartment syndrome).   No reason to expect any of them to be HOFers, but also no reason why if they stay healthy and continue improving that we don't start talking about them being at the HOF level in 4-5 more years.     In all honesty, it is way too early to tell if this class will stack up to the 2018 class.  We really won't know for another 4-5 years when we see which guys from the 2018 draft are given/not given contract extensions and when the current class is at the same point.      As far as just judging by rookie season alone, it's not unreasonable to think it won't be another >30 years before we see rookie teammates on the first team all-pro squad together (believe Butkus and Sayers was 1965).  That said, aside from Q and Leonard we got solid contributions from Smith and Hines on O, saw solid ST contributions from Franklin and Adams (with Franklin playing a minimal D role as a fill-in starter 2 games and Adams basically invisible on D), got very little from Turay and Lewis and basically nothing from Fountain, Cain.  Wilkins was OK as a 3rd RB and OK as a kick returner and our only UDFA who did anything noteworthy wad Odum as a solid STer and with a couple decent starts when he was needed due to injury.   Overall we had 4 of 11 picks (or 4 of 12 rookies who contributed) who really didn't do much as rookies (33% vs. 66% percent who contributed significantly in some aspect of the game).     So in short, the 2018 class as rookies had 2 studs (Q and Leonard), 2 guys who contributed solidly on O (Hines and Smith), 4 solid ST contributors (Odum, Adams, Franklin, Wilkins), 4 guys who really did nothing (Turay, Lewis, Cain, Fountain).   Three years later, we still have 2 studs (Q and Leonard), 1 very solid RT (Smith),  2 guys who are doing well in a RB rotation (Hines and Wilkins), 2 unknowns on the DL (Lewis and Turay - by far Lewis' best year, but he hasn't really been great), and 3 solid STers (Odum, Franklin, Adams and 4 if you count Hines).   Then we have Cain (gone) and Fountain (still pretty much doing nothing).  Again, about 2/3 of these guys are still contributing solidly in some way on the team, with the other 1/3 still unknown or not doing much (Turay started to come on last year and Lewis is recently coming on this year, so if they both continue, we may see 83% of that class as solid contributors moving forward).     The 2020 class as rookies -- we have 1 borderline stud (Blackmon), 2 very solid  O contributors (Taylor and Pittman), 3 very solid ST contributors (Rodgers, Glasgow, Blankenship), 1 guy who has been OK in a pinch as a backup or extra lineman (Pinter), 1 guy who has made the active roster after mostly being on the PS (Windsor - IMO, he's about as valuable to this year's team as Lewis was at the same point in 2018), 1 guy who has been very solid the past few weeks (Harris) and 2 guys (Eason and Patmon) who have been on the roster but inactive.  That puts us at 7 or 8 guys who have been solid contributors out of 11 as rookies (63% or 72%) and 3 or 4 guys (Eason, Patmon, Windsor, maybe Pinter) for a total of 27-36% of rookies who are not doing much at this point of the season (this could change moving forward if Pinter has to fill in for Kelly for a while and/or if Windsor takes on a bigger role down the stretch, it is not coincidence to me that he was activated the week we cut Day).  So right now, we're looking at 30-40% of our rookies not producing too much, but this could change to 20% (assuming Eason and Patmon don't play this year and Pinter and Windsor see increasing roles).     Overall, Ballard is >60% in both drafts in terms of having productive players as rookies.  It is very unlikely we'll see any team have 2 first team all-pros as rookies again in the near future (or ever).  We may see a DROY from the 2020 draft class like we saw in the 2018 draft class on this team.  Both Leonard and Blackmon have been criticized for being picked too early, etc... Ballard has proven those doubters wrong.     When we look back in a few years, if Eason is a franchise QB and Pittman and Patmon are a solid WR duo (perhaps Harris is still performing well), Taylor is a bellcow >1,200 yard rusher, Blackmon is an all-pro, Pinter is a starter (RG or RT), Rodgers is giving us a TD or more per year as a return guy, Glasgow is a solid STer, Hot Rod is a probowl K, and Windsor is still in the DL rotation and this draft could be better than the 2018 draft.  Again, too early to tell.  If we want to consider Buckner a part of the 2020 draft (the 13th pick), I think there's a good argument that the 2020 draft will exceed the 2018 draft.   Also, something to keep in mind -- our team was in very bad shape when Ballard took over.  In 2017, he was drafting for a team with a coach we pretty much all knew was going to be gone in a year.  In 2018, it was a lot easier to get significant playing time on the roster (at least IMO) because it was so bad.  In a short time, Ballard has put a lot of solid pieces together and this team is a much more difficult team to make the final roster, let alone get significant playing time as a rookie.     I agree with you on your Blackmon assessment.  It'd be cool if he got DROY... and he has made several key plays at critical times (e.g., forced fumble in OT last week)... but he's not perfect.  TBH, I think it was kind of disappointing that the long ball from Rodgers to MVS was not broken up near the end of the 4th quarter.  Blackmon was a step or two behind, but I think most very high end safeties would have broken that play up.     McDaniels dissing Ballard may have actually made Ballard's job easier.  I think Reich was the right guy for this team and after seeing Patricia fired from DET, and looking at stats of Belichick's coordinators who went on to head coaching jobs, they have a pretty poor track record.     Yes, I think Q and Leonard's play has been solid this year, but I don't think either of them deserve to be all-pros (at least not 1st team).  Won't be shocked if Q gets selected though, mainly because of his name and the fact Baldy and other reporters like to really focus on his positive plays.  He's been beaten more this year than I can remember (which is still not a lot) and has more holds than I remember in his first 2 years.     Agree, the most deserving of all-pro on this roster is Buckner (though, I can't see him getting the nod due to lack of stats and the fact that Donald and other interior DL in the league are playing at very high levels).  Second most deserving, IMO, is Hot Rod -- he's likely to be leading the league in points scored after tomorrow's game.  Just hit a big game winner.  Has a solid chance of ending the season >90% FG made and leading the league in points scored -- it'd be hard to vote against him for at least 2nd team K if he finishes the year >90% FG made and leads league in points.
    • I'm surprised we towards the middle on this (37). Thought we'd be lower.
  • Members

    • crazycolt1

      crazycolt1 14,224

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 10,602

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • HungarianColtsFan

      HungarianColtsFan 2,222

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • King Colt

      King Colt 1,925

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Knuckles79

      Knuckles79 169

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ScotColt

      ScotColt 109

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Clem-Dog

      Clem-Dog 420

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Solon

      Solon 586

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 9,702

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ProblChld32

      ProblChld32 769

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...