Frank Reich is bad at calling plays.

[GoColts8818]

Great that he’s admitted it wasnt the best play call now make it NOT one of your core plays...

[Colts1324]

23 hours ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

The call to go for it was correct. The playcall was wrong, very wrong. Period. End of story.

I would disagree. We should have kicked the FG there as our offense was stalling the entire second half and there was plenty of time for them to score.

 

 

[ColtsLegacy]

1 hour ago, Colts1324 said:

I would disagree. We should have kicked the FG there as our offense was stalling the entire second half and there was plenty of time for them to score.

 

 

 

The fact of the matter is: with or without the FG there, it's a one possession game. A TD makes it a two possession game and all but game over. 

 

It's really a simple choice and the right choice to go for it. Again, the play call was horrible, but that's a separate story.

[BeanDiasucci]

7 minutes ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

The fact of the matter is: with or without the FG there, it's a one possession game. A TD makes it a two possession game and all but game over. 

 

It's really a simple choice and the right choice to go for it. Again, the play call was horrible, but that's a separate story.

But the odds of a successful two-point conversion are just less than 50 percent. So a 7-point lead gives you a lot better chance to make it to overtime if the opponent scores. There are arguments either way, but it's not a simple choice to go for it. I'd argue that most NFL coaches would not go for it in this situation. 

[ColtsLegacy]

10 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

But the odds of a successful two-point conversion are just less than 50 percent. So a 7-point lead gives you a lot better chance to make it to overtime if the opponent scores. There are arguments either way, but it's not a simple choice to go for it. I'd argue that most NFL coaches would not go for it in this situation. 

 

I think most coaches go for it there and the ones that don't are antiquated bozo's, so to speak.

[hoosierhawk]

5 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

I disagree it was a smart move, you either get a first down (or like the last 4th down a td) or you turn the ball over where the opponents offense is in a very bad spot and you can possibly get a safety. Which they did adding two points and getting the ball late in the game. I'd say if you have a problem with play calling it should be with the last drive not the 4th down because it was a tactical risk that in the end won because Frank had faith in his defenses ability.

Give me a break. The possibility of a safety is minuscule in the first place and it did us no good as a TD was going to win it for them. You are saying it was a  tactical risk that in the end won because Frank had faith in his defenses ability.

They won a because of a bad snap on our 2 yd line. It was just dumb luck, nothing tactical about it.

[crazycolt1]

Is it really worth arguing about? Both points could be right or wrong. 

We got a break. With that said we have been on the down side of those breaks in the past so it was just our turn for one to go our way. 

[Zoltan]

24 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

Give me a break. The possibility of a safety is minuscule in the first place and it did us no good as a TD was going to win it for them. You are saying it was a  tactical risk that in the end won because Frank had faith in his defenses ability.

They won a because of a bad snap on our 2 yd line. It was just dumb luck, nothing tactical about it.

 

I disagree because after the turnover on downs, we got a safety which gave the ball back to us, now if we were able to run the clock off everyone would be praising the move, but they didn't and had to punt the ball. So overall without using hindsight it was the right move, and his faith in the defense worked because they were able to get the safety, like I said previously if their was a problem with play calling it was on the last drive where we were unable to runoff the clock.

 

Hindsight is never a good argument, you have to understand the situation, not look at the results and make an opinion, for example no one is complaining about the 4th and 4 because it was a TD, which was way more riskier than the 4th and 1. why? because they are only using hindsight or they didn't watch the game so are just going off what others saw.

[Zoltan]

1 hour ago, BeanDiasucci said:

But the odds of a successful two-point conversion are just less than 50 percent. So a 7-point lead gives you a lot better chance to make it to overtime if the opponent scores. There are arguments either way, but it's not a simple choice to go for it. I'd argue that most NFL coaches would not go for it in this situation. 

 

1 hour ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

I think most coaches go for it there and the ones that don't are antiquated bozo's, so to speak.

 

I agree that most coaches go for it just for the fact that you play to win not play for overtime

[hoosierhawk]

22 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

I disagree because after the turnover on downs, we got a safety which gave the ball back to us, now if we were able to run the clock off everyone would be praising the move, but they didn't and had to punt the ball. So overall without using hindsight it was the right move, and his faith in the defense worked because they were able to get the safety, like I said previously if their was a problem with play calling it was on the last drive where we were unable to runoff the clock.

 

Hindsight is never a good argument, you have to understand the situation, not look at the results and make an opinion, for example no one is complaining about the 4th and 4 because it was a TD, which was way more riskier than the 4th and 1. why? because they are only using hindsight or they didn't watch the game so are just going off what others saw.

4th and 4 at the 40 is a lot different than 4 and 1 at the 5. The D has 40 yards to cover from the 40 so the offense has a very open play book. 4th and 1 at the 5 restricts the offensive options considerably and consequently the D is able to stack the box and play their safeties tight to the line also. The game situation was also totally different. The 4th and 4 was in the first quarter where the 4th and 1 was with 6 minutes left in the game. The two situations are not comparable. 

[crazycolt1]

[Zoltan]

35 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

4th and 4 at the 40 is a lot different than 4 and 1 at the 5. The D has 40 yards to cover from the 40 so the offense has a very open play book. 4th and 1 at the 5 restricts the offensive options considerably and consequently the D is able to stack the box and play their safeties tight to the line also. The game situation was also totally different. The 4th and 4 was in the first quarter where the 4th and 1 was with 6 minutes left in the game. The two situations are not comparable. 

They are Comparable because they were both risky 4th down calls. If they don’t get the 4th and 4 you are giving the Texans great field position and the opportunity for easy points. Honestly I think the 4th and 4 was way more risky than the 4th and 1

[NewColtsFan]

I'm not going thru 4 pages of Frank Sucks at play calling comments.   Or Frank should turn the play calling over to Sirianni comments.

 

But I'll say that for the most part,  I like Frank as a play caller,  especially given our injury depleted WR corps,  plus our, at times, injury depleted TE corps,  plus our RB group (Minus Mack)  where almost none of them are running all that well until the last few weeks..   As a whole, our OL, whiling pass blocking well, are only recently blocking the run game better.   But still not good enough as the last two years for reasons that remain mostly unknown.

 

So....   given all that,  and that Rivers has been hovering right around his career best in completion percentage,  I think, on balance,  I'm good with Frank as a play caller.    Are there things we could be better at?   Of course....

 

I'm not a fan of this thread.   Then again,  I find myself saying that basically at least once a week during this season, sometimes more.....      Just saying....

 

[Freenyfan102]

On 12/6/2020 at 4:21 PM, AustinnKaine said:

Terrible play calling once again to finish out a game, or lose a game. Convince me otherwise. 

The more and more he starts calling stupid plays the more and more he is starting to look like Pagano soon and I hate that.

[danlhart87]

42 minutes ago, Freenyfan102 said:

The more and more he starts calling stupid plays the more and more he is starting to look like Pagano soon and I hate that.

Did people forget we won the game?

This kind of stuff is getting way out of hand.

 

[Tsarquise]

To me, going for it on fourth down was an absolute no brainer; I don't even know why it is being questioned. And the game results and the way the game played out even support the decision. The play call sucked, but that's hindsight. 

 

I tuned in to the game when it was 26 to 20, so I thought the controversy was around Frank going for it when they had 26 points and chose to pass on the field goal, and I thought there was less time on the clock, but, nope, after seeing the true circumstances I don't see how his decision is being questioned. Crazy to me. 

[danlhart87]

Just now, Tsarquise said:

To me, going for it on fourth down was an absolute no brainer; I don't even know why it is being questioned. And the game results and the way the game played out even support the decision. The play call sucked, but that's hindsight. 

This thread and all the negativity would have been credible if we lost.

 

People seem to forget the final score which is all that matters in the end.

 

 

[EastStreet]

9 hours ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

Cant blame fans for being upset with the offense under performing this season. Our defense has grown to a championship level, and the offensive coaching is a liability to the team. We have enough talent on offense to be better. The players are getting it done despite poor coaching. Ballard needs to consider some changes if this coaching staff cant get it done down the stretch.

Actually, if you look at our stats, the O is trending up, and our D is trending down... 

 

We're top 10 in O PPG. Our passing O, which was bottom 10 early, is now top 10ish. Our rushing game, which was bottom 2 or 3 early, has been climbing and is up to 20ish. Our D on the other hand, which was top 2 in most categories, is now 6th (total yards), 10th (ppg), 8th (passing yards PG), and 6th (rushing yards PG).

 

If anything, our O is getting better as we face better teams, while our D is looking more "good", than elite or championship level. Our D has a serious 1H problem. And our pass D is just nowhere near as good as some thought.

 

But I do agree that our O can still do better, and it's more play calling / game plan / personnel use than anything else, that's holding us back. It's not the only thing though. Some guys like Pittman are finally healthy and coming along. But overall, our O is trending up, despite those woes, and also despite some injuries to the OL.

 

 

[Tsarquise]

2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

This thread and all the negativity would have been credible if we lost.

 

People seem to forget the final score which is all that matters in the end.

 

 

I didn't watch the game until the end and I thought the circumstances were different. I thought it was 26-20 with little time left, which would warrant the criticism, but no, the circumstances did not warrant the criticism. Especially how it played out. 

[EastStreet]

6 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Great that he’s admitted it wasnt the best play call now make it NOT one of your core plays...

Glad he owned up. Doesn't surprise me at all. Shouldn't have been an option (using Hines up the middle) at minimum.

5 hours ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

I think most coaches go for it there and the ones that don't are antiquated bozo's, so to speak.

I'm fine with going for it, but not sure "most" go for it in that situation, and if they do, they certainly use different personnel for that play.

21 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Did people forget we won the game?

This kind of stuff is getting way out of hand.

 

 

4 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

This thread and all the negativity would have been credible if we lost.

 

People seem to forget the final score which is all that matters in the end.

 

 

[HectorRoberts]

We are 8-4 with a new quarterback that had no offseason here, and off to the best start we’ve had in 6 years, yet people are still whining? We may have the most entitled, whiny bunch of fans in the league! Let’s just celebrate a crazy win instead of throw a fit about the coaches for once!

[Mitch Connors]

19 hours ago, Colt.45 said:

 

You want to understand the answer but you don't care to hear about analytics. Essentially, you don't want the answer.

 

No, I said give me Colts specific analytics not generic win percentages. If you think the Chiefs, Jets and Colts should all run from the same probability index in that situation this conversation is pointless.

 

Thus Colts specific analytics would be great - that factors in a ball control team with a slow moving (non-explosive) offensive predicated solely on a run game with short/intermediate passing routes and a defense built to bend/not break. Id love to hear any analytic FOR THE COLTS that says go for it there. I can say with 100% certainly the Chiefs offense/defense is not described by anything I just said which makes one general win percentage a total waste. And if that's what Franks using, that's the problem.

[King Colt]

Maybe the Jets will release the HC after this year so the Colts can hire him after they dump Reich.

[danlhart87]

7 minutes ago, King Colt said:

Maybe the Jets will release the HC after this year so the Colts can hire him after they dump Reich.

[Mighty Blue]

On 12/6/2020 at 2:38 PM, AustinnKaine said:

Yeah, based on wins... no it's not. It's based on wins that count. What we just saw won't happen against any of the playoff teams.

 

So like I've been saying... if you're okay with 10-6.. loss in the Wildcard, then this recipe is perfect. Don't add anything, except for the Salt that will be poured on by all the fans complaining when it happens. 

Great response! Well said and I really do want the fans to complain. If one looks at my past responses, I mentioned how our fans are the nicest in the NFL. Angry fans do make a difference towards players and the higher up muckedy mucks!

Go Colts Fans!

[Jaredfor3]

I like the aggressive style of Reich, but sometimes you got to take the three points.  Reich has a respectable 25-18 record as coach. Reich will make the occasional bone head play call as coach , but I’d take him over most coaches in the NFL.