Regular season grade for the Colts

[DontEverGiveUp]

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I wonder how much these grades would have went down had the Bills not beat the Dolphins?

The Colts would have still went 11-5 but didn't make the playoffs? 

 

Also wonder how much they would have gone up if TEN didn't doink that FG in and lost or tied in OT.

 

I'd give it a B+.  Best record since 2014 and made the playoffs.  Lost some winnable games, but battled through adversity and kept bouncing back.  I also like that we won games in different ways...defense, special teams, and offense.  My biggest concern is some of the playcalling at times on both sides of the ball.  I'm not saying Reich and Flus weren't good overall, just that there were some frustrating moments where we were clearly being out-schemed.

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, DontEverGiveUp said:

Also wonder how much they would have gone up if TEN didn't doink that FG in and lost or tied in OT.

 

I'd give it a B+.  Best record since 2014 and made the playoffs.  Lost some winnable games, but battled through adversity and kept bouncing back.  I also like that we won games in different ways...defense, special teams, and offense.  My biggest concern is some of the playcalling at times on both sides of the ball.  I'm not saying Reich and Flus weren't good overall, just that there were some frustrating moments where we were clearly being out-schemed.

I don't feel the plays that don't work are bad plays that were called.

I say that because the general consensus about the play calling by those outside of this forum are not looked at as negative. Matter of fact most think that Reich and Eberflus are very good at play calling. 

Eberflus is even being looked at for a couple of head coaching jobs.

When fans concentrate on plays that don't work they tend to overlook those plays that do work. 

Also some seem to forget the Colts players are playing against other pro players and they are going to makes plays themselves. We have to give credit to those players on other teams for making a good play. 

We can't look at a team like the Jags and assume they don't have very talented players on their roster. 

 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

I will give us a B+. An 11-5 record and making the playoffs is very good. It would've be an A had we went 12-4 and won the division. 

[smittywerb]

Offense:  B, running game was great.  Passing game was meh.  Playcalling cost us some games but we finished with 11 wins.

 

Defense:  A, would be an A+ if we finished number one but a top 5 defense is pretty good also.  Passing Defense was our weakness.

 

Special Teams:  A+, Kickoff and punt teams showed out this year.  Rigo and Blank were solid as usual.  

[DougDew]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I don't feel the plays that don't work are bad plays that were called.

I say that because the general consensus about the play calling by those outside of this forum are not looked at as negative. Matter of fact most think that Reich and Eberflus are very good at play calling. 

Eberflus is even being looked at for a couple of head coaching jobs.

When fans concentrate on plays that don't work they tend to overlook those plays that do work. 

Also some seem to forget the Colts players are playing against other pro players and they are going to makes plays themselves. We have to give credit to those players on other teams for making a good play. 

We can't look at a team like the Jags and assume they don't have very talented players on their roster. 

 

 

IMO, this entire perception of bad play calling is a bit off. 

 

If you look at Frank's game management, I think ball control...possessing the ball a lot more than the other team....is a big part of his planning and even philosophy.  Especially if a defense is young, limiting the number of possessions the opposing offense has leads to better odds of winning.

 

That's why he's generally conservative when we're winning and have momentum, yet aggressive on 4th down.  Its about holding the ball, playing keep away, maybe even more important than scoring as many points as possible (he may look for QBs that have that trait too, as opposed to gunslinger splashy guys). 

 

A part of me thinks that Frank would rather core on a 12 play 7 minute drive than a 4 play 2 minute drive.  OTOH, we have seen how Manning and Luck wanted to do it. 

 

I think folks are looking at a different style than what we used to have, and maybe what the highlights show on ESPN, and are confusing it with bad play calling.  JMO.

 

I think Frank is very aggressive.  Aggressive about possessing the ball, not necessarily scoring.  Although I'm sure that scoring is priority 1B.

[DontEverGiveUp]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I don't feel the plays that don't work are bad plays that were called.

I say that because the general consensus about the play calling by those outside of this forum are not looked at as negative. Matter of fact most think that Reich and Eberflus are very good at play calling. 

Eberflus is even being looked at for a couple of head coaching jobs.

When fans concentrate on plays that don't work they tend to overlook those plays that do work. 

Also some seem to forget the Colts players are playing against other pro players and they are going to makes plays themselves. We have to give credit to those players on other teams for making a good play. 

We can't look at a team like the Jags and assume they don't have very talented players on their roster. 

 

 

Like I said, I think Reich and Flus have been good.  There have just been some times where they made questionable calls - soft zone/prevent defense, putting Jacoby in when he shouldn't be, trying to run Hines up the gut on 3rd/4th and short, going for it instead of taking 3, etc.

 

I'm not ignoring the good calls, there have no doubt been a lot of them.

[Four2itus]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Also some seem to forget the Colts players are playing against other pro players and they are going to makes plays themselves. We have to give credit to those players on other teams for making a good play. 

Hold it.....I thought that with every single failure, there must be blame!! Lol.... Seriously, I agree with all my being. When a defense makes a stop at the goal line, you can either say the offense failed, or the defense made a great play. The difference is simple... you're own personal choice of perspective. Thank the universe I love to talk about what went right. I am amazed at those comments that appear to assume that complaining here, will help change things. It is quite sad in a way. Chose your fan path! I choose to relish what is going right.....and dammit, the Colts won 11 games and are in the playoffs. So much good to talk about!

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

IMO, this entire perception of bad play calling is a bit off. 

 

If you look at Frank's game management, I think ball control...possessing the ball a lot more than the other team....is a big part of his planning and even philosophy.  Especially if a defense is young, limiting the number of possessions the opposing offense has leads to better odds of winning.

 

That's why he's generally conservative when we're winning and have momentum, yet aggressive on 4th down.  Its about holding the ball, playing keep away, maybe even more important than scoring as many points as possible

I also think there is also quite a bit of play "setting up" for the playoffs. Frank has been around this block alot in the NFL. He thinks long term, not just stats for today. I agree with you. The Colts may get bounced in the first round as the Bills are for real. But I think Frank is the right guy for this team and culture. 

[Smonroe]

C+  Easiest schedule in the AFC.  Finished with a middle of the AFC record.  Played bad against bad teams.  Very few games where the offense or defense was consistent.

 

Using the old adage - You are what your record says you are.  The Colts are a little better than average.

 

This has no bearing on how they'll do Saturday though, the potential is there (good and bad).

[aaron11]

15 hours ago, Colt.45 said:

There's no way Houston (who lost 12 games) are weaker than some of the sides who finished with better records.

i dont think they are much better than their record said.  they were good at passing but that was it, nfl.com and cbs ranked them 27th and 28th

 

they were near the bottom of the league in defense and rushing.  also had a weak SOS playing many of the same teams as us.  theirs is a little higher than ours because they played us and we played them

[r a y s k i]

A- overall.

I think we can go in and surprise a team like the Bills mainly because they are inexperienced as an organisation but I don't think we match up well against the Chiefs at all. But first we see what happens in Buffalo.

[Myles]

2 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

 

Using the old adage - You are what your record says you are.  The Colts are a little better than average.

 

11-5 is just a bit better than average?  The average win total was 8.   

The only teams with more wins than the Colts are:

Chiefs

Bills

Steelers

Packers

Saints

Seahawks

 

[Myles]

14 minutes ago, Myles said:

11-5 is just a bit better than average?  The average win total was 8.   

The only teams with more wins than the Colts are:

Chiefs

Bills

Steelers

Packers

Saints

Seahawks

 

The Colts were in the top 78% of NFL teams in wins.

[Four2itus]

26 minutes ago, Myles said:

The Colts were in the top 78% of NFL teams in wins.

Forget it. It's the "I have been wronged" effect on perspective. It can be subtle, but you can always see it. The opposite is the "I refuse to see the teams flaws" effect on perspective. I take the latter.....it's more fun. 

[IinD]

I give them a heck yeah .

 

Any season that's entertaining and goes into the playoffs is a winner for me.

 

Way better then the 3-13 and let's start looking at the draft in October nonsense type season.

[throwing BBZ]

 Went into the season saying ____ the NFL.
But it's the COLTS! So... still not much interested while Rivers was throwing interceptions and
Jonathon Taylor looked kinda lost.
 Yes Frank and Rivers had trouble managing a 60 minute game plan, but once Taylor got his reads down 
i was loving me some Colts FB. A (Rock/Ugh) solid B.
 Ballard and his team can keep us competitive and that feels very good.

[Smash Mouth]

3 hours ago, Myles said:

11-5 is just a bit better than average?  The average win total was 8.   

The only teams with more wins than the Colts are:

Chiefs

Bills

Steelers

Packers

Saints

Seahawks

 

We're a good team.  Period.  I won't be the least bit surprised if we take down the Bills

[Smonroe]

3 hours ago, Myles said:

11-5 is just a bit better than average?  The average win total was 8.   

The only teams with more wins than the Colts are:

Chiefs

Bills

Steelers

Packers

Saints

Seahawks

 

 

First of all, notice I said "in the AFC".

 

The Colts had the 7th best record in the AFC (when you factor in the tie breakers, and they sure count, don't they?).  There were 9 teams with worse records.

 

That makes them right in the middle of the AFC pack, so a little better than average.  

 

You can spin it any way you want, but given they had the easiest schedule in the AFC and barely made the playoffs, does not warrant more than a C+ in my book.  Maybe I'm a hard grader.

[CoachLite]

7 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

First of all, notice I said "in the AFC".

 

The Colts had the 7th best record in the AFC (when you factor in the tie breakers, and they sure count, don't they?).  There were 9 teams with worse records.

 

That makes them right in the middle of the AFC pack, so a little better than average.  

 

You can spin it any way you want, but given they had the easiest schedule in the AFC and barely made the playoffs, does not warrant more than a C+ in my book.  Maybe I'm a hard grader.

The AFC was a strong conference this year. Within the conference, I'd give them a C+ as well, but a B in the context of the entire NFL. I think they have the on-field talent to get an A, which is a sad commentary.

[Smonroe]

5 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

The AFC was a strong conference this year. Within the conference, I'd give them a C+ as well, but a B in the context of the entire NFL. I think they have the on-field talent to get an A, which is a sad commentary.

 

The NFC East lowers the curve, lol!  We have to admit that our secondary is mediocre at best, and we're getting very little rush from the outside guys.

 

Very talented in some areas, more than most teams.  Sub par in the D secondary.  I think they could call PI's on Rock and he wasn't even playing Sunday.  OT, DE, and DB have to be taken care of this off season.  Draft of FA's.

[gspdx]

Looking at NFL.com standings for the league the Colts are 9th out of 32.  Good - not great.

 

Gets a B from me.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

B-