Without a Franchise QB - The window is Closing for the Colts

[Chloe6124 9,822]

6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

And that's why most teams aren't SB contenders. 

 

You can contend with a B grade offense if you have an A grade defense, or vice versa. If you have a B grade offense and a B grade defense -- like the Colts in 2020 -- you might win 11 games, maybe even a playoff game, but you're probably not winning a SB.

 

So if Ballard felt like we had the pieces to make a push for SB contention in 2020, I think he recognizes that either the defense has to be better against top competition, or the offense has to be more dynamic and efficient in critical situations. But right now, we're not good enough, and a real examination of 2020 shows that clearly.

I guess there aren’t many teams with great defenses. I think I would rather have a grade A  offense and a slightly worse D. At least then you know we have a QB that can run a two minute drill. 

 

I know the  stats looked good on offense but we need to try and get into the top 5 or so. We need to throw more in the red zone. 

[Chloe6124 9,822]

6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

The Eagles apparently want to keep Wentz; I don't know how they're going to make that work, get under the cap, and keep Hurts, but whatever. If they want to move him, I'd take him on the Colts for sure, but the question is about compensation. I wouldn't spend major compensation for him.

I honk he needs out of there. Having hurts breathing down your back and a statue of Foles can’t do much for your confidence. Then every time he makes a bad play fans are going to be calling for Hurts to play. I do think they will keep him for one more year though.

[Arodgers12 320]

3 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I honk he needs out of there. Having hurts breathing down your back and a statue of Foles can’t do much for your confidence. Then every time he makes a bad play fans are going to be calling for Hurts to play. I do think they will keep him for one more year though.

You guys think you’ll be back in the playoffs next year?

[Superman 9,214]

6 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I guess there aren’t many teams with great defenses. I think I would rather have a grade A  offense and a slightly worse D. At least then you know we have a QB that can run a two minute drill. 

 

I know the  stats looked good on offense but we need to try and get into the top 5 or so. We need to throw more in the red zone. 

 

Just need to be better in the red zone, I don't care how. We were 57%, which is bottom half of the league. Teams like the Vikings, Niners, Lions and even the Eagles were better than us.

 

Same on third down.

 

If we run it back with Rivers, it's not likely that we improve dramatically in either area. That means the defense needs to perform better against good QBs.

 

My point is that the 2020 team had some deficiencies that need to be acknowledged, and I hope Ballard doesn't think we're good enough to try again without considerable upgrades.

[BProland85 1,389]

This team is where KC was talent wise when they made their bold move up to draft Patrick Mahomes. They were picking 27th, and moved all the way up to 10th overall to select Mahomes. Colin Cowherd even had a video piece on this very topic that Colts should make their bold move for their franchise QB. 

 

To do this they just had to give up their 27th overall pick, their 3rd rounder, and 2018 1st round pick.

 

Indy should be able to move into the top 10 from where they are at to get one of these top QBs not named Lawrence if they choose to do so. And that kind of compensation wouldn't cripple the Colts by any means. 

[NewColtsFan 8,380]

1 hour ago, RollerColt said:

Agreed. I want a team that is stable and working to the future. Going all in is instant gratification. It's fun at the time, but afterwards you have to face the music. Especially with a pandemic year, and a lowered cap. Right now, we've barely got money. There's some there to play with, but it's still going to lead to hard decisions. Thanks to COVID-19, I could see us actually losing talent instead of gaining talent. 

 

Trying to go all in right now would be counterproductive to Ballard's plan and ambitions. 

I think I’ve ready that since AC’s retirement,  the Colts have the 2nd or third most money.  Mid-60’s.   So we’re pretty good thete.

 

The problem is...   we’ve got to pay Q, Leonard, Smith, and they’re all going to get well over 10+ mill a year.  So that will eat into the amount we have pretty quickly.  And then, there’s everybody else we still have/want to sign.  So the number will shrink pretty quickly. 

[King Colt 942]

On 1/18/2021 at 10:29 AM, jvan1973 said:

We have Taylor.   Who is the other stud running back?

Check the injured reserve list

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,796]

1 hour ago, Chloe6124 said:

I guess there aren’t many teams with great defenses. I think I would rather have a grade A  offense and a slightly worse D. At least then you know we have a QB that can run a two minute drill. 

 

I know the  stats looked good on offense but we need to try and get into the top 5 or so. We need to throw more in the red zone. 

Your right.

 

There really aren't any great defenses. At least not for any length of time. Sure , a few teams D will play at a high level for a while,  but not game in/game out for a significant time.

 

While the great Offense's, with the Elite QB's,  are there consistently. 

[Superman 9,214]

There absolutely are very good defenses. Probably never gonna see the early 2000s Bucs or Ravens again, but the Rams allowed 50 fewer passing yards/game, 4 fewer points/game, had 13 more sacks than us, and passer rating against was 10 points lower.

 

Acting like major improvements on defense are unattainable doesn't make sense.

[Nickster 836]

6 minutes ago, Superman said:

There absolutely are very good defenses. Probably never gonna see the early 2000s Bucs or Ravens again, but the Rams allowed 50 fewer passing yards/game, 4 fewer points/game, had 13 more sacks than us, and passer rating against was 10 points lower.

 

Acting like major improvements on defense are unattainable doesn't make sense.

But acting like a defense is going to win you a championship in 2021 also doesn't make sense.  

 

The new mantra should be 

 

"Defense occasionally holds good teams to field goals.  Offense wins championships."

[jvan1973 5,351]

33 minutes ago, King Colt said:

Check the injured reserve list

The only back on the injured reserve list is Mack who is a free agent and will probably not be here next season

[chad72 7,153]

7 minutes ago, Nickster said:

But acting like a defense is going to win you a championship in 2021 also doesn't make sense.  

 

The new mantra should be 

 

"Defense occasionally holds good teams to field goals.  Offense wins championships."

 

Hmm...none of the QBs threw for 300 yards in the divisional round and balance was the name of the game for all division round winners EXCEPT The Bills who believe in playing to their strengths. Only 2 teams scored 30 points or more with their defense playing a big part in generating field position for the offense. A big contrast from the regular season where points galore was the name of the game.

 

The key is having fresh enough legs on both ends without tiring them out because of long spells of ineptitude giving up long drives on defense or going first down and out or 3 and out on offense.

 

 

[Nickster 836]

Just now, chad72 said:

 

Hmm...none of the QBs threw for 300 yards in the divisional round and balance was the name of the game for all wild card winners EXCEPT The Bills who believe in playing to their strengths. Only 2 teams scored 30 points or more with their defense playing a big part in generating field position for the offense. A big contrast from the regular season where points galore was the name of the game.

 

The key is having fresh enough legs on both ends without tiring them out because of long spells of ineptitude giving up long drives on defense or going first down and out or 3 and out on offense.

 

 

Meh. I mean if you are saying that Defenses that hold oppenents to under 30 points win championships, it doesn't quite have the ring to it.

[chad72 7,153]

3 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Meh. I mean if you are saying that Defenses that hold oppenents to under 30 points win championships, it doesn't quite have the ring to it.

 

If only 2 teams scored 30, and all the losing teams scored 20 or less, that tells you how this week went. Not at all what I was saying. Meh, to be expected from you. 

[Chloe6124 9,822]

34 minutes ago, Superman said:

There absolutely are very good defenses. Probably never gonna see the early 2000s Bucs or Ravens again, but the Rams allowed 50 fewer passing yards/game, 4 fewer points/game, had 13 more sacks than us, and passer rating against was 10 points lower.

 

Acting like major improvements on defense are unattainable doesn't make sense.

I think our defense needs to be better for  sure. But if small sacrifices are needed because of the cap I would rather those be on defense. 

27 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

The only back on the injured reserve list is Mack who is a free agent and will probably not be here next season

I would actually say Hines is a star. 

[Imgrandojji 1,260]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

And that's why most teams aren't SB contenders. 

 

You can contend with a B grade offense if you have an A grade defense, or vice versa. If you have a B grade offense and a B grade defense -- like the Colts in 2020 -- you might win 11 games, maybe even a playoff game, but you're probably not winning a SB.

 

So if Ballard felt like we had the pieces to make a push for SB contention in 2020, I think he recognizes that either the defense has to be better against top competition, or the offense has to be more dynamic and efficient in critical situations. But right now, we're not good enough, and a real examination of 2020 shows that clearly.

not saying you're wrong but I will say that execution played a bigger role than you're letting on here.  We hat the talent to perform better than we did.  If you have an A level defense but don't execute at an A level, you're going to get the same underperformance as if it was a personnel problem.

 

In particular I think our secondary needs a coaching switchup.  Our front 7 is nearly legendary but the secondary has issues that urgently need addressed.  For whatever reason the issues with our secondary resulted in a lot of soft zones despite a front 7 that plays better in other formation.

 

I think if we can get those big issues in the secondary addressed that we can compete with a lesser light at QB.  

[Superman 9,214]

48 minutes ago, Nickster said:

But acting like a defense is going to win you a championship in 2021 also doesn't make sense.  

 

The new mantra should be 

 

"Defense occasionally holds good teams to field goals.  Offense wins championships."

 

I disagree with this. You don't have to have a top five defense to win a SB, but you have to be capable of getting stops and making plays, especially against good QBs. 

 

Also, I'm not acting like a defense is going to win a championship for us. My point is that if we're really trying to contend with Rivers at QB, the defense needs to be a lot better.

[Chloe6124 9,822]

The thing I don’t like about our offense to some degree is we have to play perfect. There is no room for error. Do the chiefs or Bills play perfect? No. But they have the talent to overcome it. I just want to eventually have a QB and offensive weapons that allow us for a little margin for error. Every little mistake is magnified because there is no room for error. We don’t need much of a upgrade with the offense. Just a little bit.

[Superman 9,214]

8 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

not saying you're wrong but I will say that execution played a bigger role than you're letting on here.  We hat the talent to perform better than we did.  If you have an A level defense but don't execute at an A level, you're going to get the same underperformance as if it was a personnel problem.

 

In particular I think our secondary needs a coaching switchup.  Our front 7 is nearly legendary but the secondary has issues that urgently need addressed.  For whatever reason the issues with our secondary resulted in a lot of soft zones despite a front 7 that plays better in other formation.

 

I think if we can get those big issues in the secondary addressed that we can compete with a lesser light at QB.  

 

I'm not sure which part of my comment suggests I don't think execution was a major factor in defensive breakdowns. But if we're expecting Rock Ya Sin to stop making mistakes so our defense can cover better on the back end, I think that's a mistake.

 

Also, a major factor in the defensive breakdowns, especially late in plays, was a lack of dynamic pass rush. 

 

Lastly, people blame "soft zone" a lot, and I think that's become a mistaken conclusion that is widely accepted. The truth is, all of our coverages had success, and all of our coverages had failures. In fact, early in the season (aside from the opener), the major failures were just blown coverages in man and zone, not QBs beating soft zone coverage.

 

My inclination is to think we need better corner play and more pass rush. And I don't think we have the players on the roster to provide the boost we need.

[NewColtsFan 8,380]

There’s a good reason why defense everywhere suffered badly.   I can explain it in one word.  And you know the word. 

Come on EVERYBODY say it with me!!!!

 

COVID!!   C-O-V-I-D!!

 

Defenses were poorer in the NFL and the college level as well.   Much less practice.  Much less contact.  Much less close up coaching.  Far more walk throughs.   
 

When the world returns to normal, defenses will get better.  So will football. 

[Nickster 836]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I disagree with this. You don't have to have a top five defense to win a SB, but you have to be capable of getting stops and making plays, especially against good QBs. 

 

Also, I'm not acting like a defense is going to win a championship for us. My point is that if we're really trying to contend with Rivers at QB, the defense needs to be a lot better.

The trend is for the best offenses to be the teams contending for the Superbowl.  Are you aware of the basic Defense wins championships mantra?  You know Offense scores points?   I assume you are

 

Interstingly, the last really good D to win Superbowl was PHI and they had to score 44 points to do it v. No. 1 yanked Offense NE. And the Foles led offense carried them through the playoffs.  Before that it was Mannings Broncos.

 

Also intersesting is the 13-3 NE over LAR SB, featured the 25th and 27th ranked Ds in football.  

 

 

The way to win in today's NFL is with high powered NFL passing offenses.  The rules are and have been set up that way increasingly over the last 20 years.

 

It's a lot different than when we were kids.

 

So like I said, it's usually Offense wins championships, Defense tries to hold teams to FGs.  There are occasionally anomalies but this is bascially accurate in todays' NFL.

[Chloe6124 9,822]

18 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

There’s a good reason why defense everywhere suffered badly.   I can explain it in one word.  And you know the word. 

Come on EVERYBODY say it with me!!!!

 

COVID!!   C-O-V-I-D!!

 

Defenses were poorer in the NFL and the college level as well.   Much less practice.  Much less contact.  Much less close up coaching.  Far more walk throughs.   
 

When the world returns to normal, defenses will get better.  So will football. 

Some of that might even been the lack of crowd noise.

[NewColtsFan 8,380]

1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:

Some of that might even been the lack of crowd noise.

Crowd noise?    Sorry....   I don’t understand...

 

[Superman 9,214]

3 minutes ago, Nickster said:

The trend is for the best offenses to be the teams contending for the Superbowl.  Are you aware of the basic Defense wins championships mantra?  You know Offense scores points?   I assume you are

 

Interstingly, the last really good D to win Superbowl was PHI and they had to score 44 points to do it v. No. 1 yanked Offense NE. And the Foles led offense carried them through the playoffs.  Before that it was Mannings Broncos.

 

Also intersesting is the 13-3 NE over LAR SB, featured the 25th and 27th ranked Ds in football.  

 

 

The way to win in today's NFL is with high powered NFL passing offenses.  The rules are and have been set up that way increasingly over the last 20 years.

 

It's a lot different than when we were kids.

 

So like I said, it's usually Offense wins championships, Defense tries to hold teams to FGs.  There are occasionally anomalies but this is bascially accurate in todays' NFL.

 

I think you're mistaken on several fronts.

 

First, in general, my point was that either our offense has to be better, or our defense has to be better. We can't have a B level offense AND defense and really expect to contend. So if we keep Rivers, the defense has to be better, especially against good QBs. 

 

Second, if you only focus on the scores in the SB, then yeah, you might conclude that defense is overrated, but that's silly because there are a lot of games to be won to get to the SB in the first place. You gave the 2017 Eagles as an example, and they gave up 33 points in the SB, but only 10 points in the divisional game (only scored 15), and 7 points in the conference championship. They went 13-3 and were a contender to begin with partly due to their top five defense. 

 

The 2018 Patriots were a better defense than they got credit for (they were 10th in net yards/pass attempt, 7th in points allowed, and 5th in turnovers), and it was their defense that set the tone in the SB, only allowing three points. It's weird that you'd even use that team as an example.

 

And last year's Chiefs team had it's strong points defensively. They won the last six games of the season to get the #1 seed, giving up an average of 11.5 points/game, and they were 7th in points allowed over the season.

 

Of course you have to have a good offense, I've never said otherwise. But you also need a defense that can make some plays. 

[chad72 7,153]

10 minutes ago, Nickster said:

The trend is for the best offenses to be the teams contending for the Superbowl.  Are you aware of the basic Defense wins championships mantra?  You know Offense scores points?   I assume you are

 

Interstingly, the last really good D to win Superbowl was PHI and they had to score 44 points to do it v. No. 1 yanked Offense NE. And the Foles led offense carried them through the playoffs.  Before that it was Mannings Broncos.

 

Also intersesting is the 13-3 NE over LAR SB, featured the 25th and 27th ranked Ds in football.  

 

 

The way to win in today's NFL is with high powered NFL passing offenses.  The rules are and have been set up that way increasingly over the last 20 years.

 

It's a lot different than when we were kids.

 

So like I said, it's usually Offense wins championships, Defense tries to hold teams to FGs.  There are occasionally anomalies but this is bascially accurate in todays' NFL.

 

That is so short sighted.

 

The way to get to the playoffs in the NFL is with high powered NFL passing offenses (been the case since the Peyton days). However, once you get there, you are playing very good defenses as well. Plus, I don't need to explain the rope-a-dope the Colts pulled from 32nd ranking rushing D to win the SB. Not to mention the 31st/32nd ranked defense in the Patriots going to the SB in 2011. I don't need to remind you the Saints, who were 25th or 26th overall D in the NFL beating the Colts in SB 44.

 

Bottom line - regardless of where you finished and how you finished in the regular season, good coaching helps you turn things around and your regular season ranks is not what wins you championships, your adjustments and ability to maximize strengths and minimize weaknesses gets magnified come playoff time. 

 

If you look at metrics, we did have once in a decade D like the 2000 Ravens with the 2013 Seahawks and the 2015 Broncos that played under even more QB friendly rules than the 2000 Ravens. So, yes, building such Ds is definitely possible with the high rate of draft picks working out like the 2013 Seahawks or high hit rate in free agency like the 2015 Broncos. You are not going to stop the best of offenses to under 20 points most of the time but if you can limit their possessions and keep them in that sweet spot of under 25, you have a puncher's chance of scoring just enough to win, for which you need a good defense for those timely stops. 

[Nickster 836]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think you're mistaken on several fronts.

 

First, in general, my point was that either our offense has to be better, or our defense has to be better. We can't have a B level offense AND defense and really expect to contend. So if we keep Rivers, the defense has to be better, especially against good QBs. 

 

Second, if you only focus on the scores in the SB, then yeah, you might conclude that defense is overrated, but that's silly because there are a lot of games to be won to get to the SB in the first place. You gave the 2017 Eagles as an example, and they gave up 33 points in the SB, but only 10 points in the divisional game (only scored 15), and 7 points in the conference championship. They went 13-3 and were a contender to begin with partly due to their top five defense. 

 

The 2018 Patriots were a better defense than they got credit for (they were 10th in net yards/pass attempt, 7th in points allowed, and 5th in turnovers), and it was their defense that set the tone in the SB, only allowing three points. It's weird that you'd even use that team as an example.

 

And last year's Chiefs team had it's strong points defensively. They won the last six games of the season to get the #1 seed, giving up an average of 11.5 points/game, and they were 7th in points allowed over the season.

 

Of course you have to have a good offense, I've never said otherwise. But you also need a defense that can make some plays. 

I conceded the PHI had a good D and know my point is not being made by this weekends games and the single SB scores. 

 

The preponderence of the evidence shows that offensive teams dominate in the playoffs and in championships.

 

If you disagree with that then fine.  

[Nickster 836]

6 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

That is so short sighted.

 

The way to get to the playoffs in the NFL is with high powered NFL passing offenses (been the case since the Peyton days). However, once you get there, you are playing very good defenses as well. Plus, I don't need to explain the rope-a-dope the Colts pulled from 32nd ranking rushing D to win the SB. Not to mention the 31st/32nd ranked defense in the Patriots going to the SB in 2011. I don't need to remind you the Saints, who were 25th or 26th overall D in the NFL beating the Colts in SB 44.

 

Bottom line - regardless of where you finished and how you finished in the regular season, good coaching helps you turn things around and your regular season ranks is not what wins you championships, your adjustments and ability to maximize strengths and minimize weaknesses gets magnified come playoff time. 

 

If you look at metrics, we did have once in a decade D like the 2000 Ravens with the 2013 Seahawks and the 2015 Broncos that played under even more QB friendly rules than the 2000 Ravens. So, yes, building such Ds is definitely possible with the high rate of draft picks working out like the 2013 Seahawks or high hit rate in free agency like the 2015 Broncos. You are not going to stop the best of offenses to under 20 points most of the time but if you can limit their possessions and keep them in that sweet spot of under 25, you have a puncher's chance of scoring just enough to win, for which you need a good defense for those timely stops. 

So yes like I said for like the 4th time.  Defense holds good teams to FGs while offense wins championships.

 

 

 

 

[shasta519 2,829]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Just need to be better in the red zone, I don't care how. We were 57%, which is bottom half of the league. Teams like the Vikings, Niners, Lions and even the Eagles were better than us.

 

Same on third down.

 

If we run it back with Rivers, it's not likely that we improve dramatically in either area. That means the defense needs to perform better against good QBs.

 

My point is that the 2020 team had some deficiencies that need to be acknowledged, and I hope Ballard doesn't think we're good enough to try again without considerable upgrades.

 

Agree...and I don't think Ballard honestly believes they are. I think he has some serious plans this offseason.

 

I posted in another thread...but the goal should be to be top 5 on offense. Top 5 offenses are the only ones left in the CCGs...and a top 5 offense has won the SB the past five years. Pair that with the fact that the Colts play in a dome...and the strategy should be clear. The best way to travel in the playoffs is to not travel at all.

 

IMO they aren't getting there with Rivers...and they aren't getting there without better weapons. KC was actually able to peak as a top 5 offense with Smith...but it wasn't until Mahomes took over that they were a serious threat. You really have to have both.

 

 

 

[Superman 9,214]

1 minute ago, shasta519 said:

 

Agree...and I don't think Ballard honestly believes they are. I think he has some serious plans this offseason.

 

I posted in another thread...but the goal should be to be top 5 on offense. Top 5 offenses are the only ones left in the CCGs...and a top 5 offense has won the SB the past five years. Pair that with the fact that the Colts play in a dome...and the strategy should be clear. The best way to travel in the playoffs is to not travel at all.

 

IMO they aren't getting there with Rivers...and they aren't getting there without better weapons. KC was actually able to peak as a top 5 offense with Smith...but it wasn't until Mahomes took over that they were a serious threat. You really have to have both.

 

The year the Chiefs were top 5 offensively with Smith, Smith was suddenly an incredible playmaker, and I think he led the league in explosive pass plays that year. Totally opposite of the way he played his entire career. So yeah, really good QBing.

[King Colt 942]

1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

The only back on the injured reserve list is Mack who is a free agent and will probably not be here next season

"probably" means probably. It's a little early to start posting the roster.

[Superman 9,214]

11 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I conceded the PHI had a good D and know my point is not being made by this weekends games and the single SB scores. 

 

The preponderence of the evidence shows that offensive teams dominate in the playoffs and in championships.

 

If you disagree with that then fine.  

 

You're not acknowledging that the teams that do well in the playoffs tend to be pretty good on both sides of the ball, which was my original point. The Chiefs didn't go to the SB just because they have a good offense, it's because they had a good offense and a pretty good defense.

 

We're stuck at B level on both sides of the ball right now. We can't run this back without upgrading at least one side of the ball.

[stitches 8,055]

55 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

not saying you're wrong but I will say that execution played a bigger role than you're letting on here.  We hat the talent to perform better than we did.  If you have an A level defense but don't execute at an A level, you're going to get the same underperformance as if it was a personnel problem.

 

In particular I think our secondary needs a coaching switchup.  Our front 7 is nearly legendary but the secondary has issues that urgently need addressed.  For whatever reason the issues with our secondary resulted in a lot of soft zones despite a front 7 that plays better in other formation.

 

I think if we can get those big issues in the secondary addressed that we can compete with a lesser light at QB.  

I don't know how we can be an A-level defense without any A-level EDGE player or A-level CB. The most important things in modern football - pass-defense we are nowhere close to A level at. We ranked in the 20s in pressure rates, and in the middle of the pack in coverage. This was not an A-level defense. We had great run-defense, but the rest needs tons of improvement to get to A level. 

[Superman 9,214]

1 minute ago, King Colt said:

"probably" means probably. It's a little early to start posting the roster.

 

We knew the day he got hurt that Mack was done as a Colt.

[Nickster 836]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

You're not acknowledging that the teams that do well in the playoffs tend to be pretty good on both sides of the ball, which was my original point. The Chiefs didn't go to the SB just because they have a good offense, it's because they had a good offense and a pretty good defense.

 

We're stuck at B level on both sides of the ball right now. We can't run this back without upgrading at least one side of the ball.

Supe the Chiefs gave up 25 ppg and 388 ypg in the playoffs last year.  I mean you can't be completely incompetent, but all you need to be able to do when you have the Chiefs offense is HOLD Teams to FGs.

 

 

I agree with alot of what you are saying.  Here is what I am saying.  You need to keep the D resources at B level IMO and try to make the offense into an A level in today's NFL with today's rules.  

 

 

[Nickster 836]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

You're not acknowledging that the teams that do well in the playoffs tend to be pretty good on both sides of the ball, which was my original point. The Chiefs didn't go to the SB just because they have a good offense, it's because they had a good offense and a pretty good defense.

 

We're stuck at B level on both sides of the ball right now. We can't run this back without upgrading at least one side of the ball.

 

So Supe,  I think from reading your opinions over various topics, I know how you will answer this.

 

If you could only improve one or the other, the Colts D or O, which would you improve and why?  You have to generalize here, don't be specific, by that I mean talking specific moves.

 

Given Colts D is B and Colts O is B (which I concur on BTW)'  If you could only improve one to try to win a championship, which would it be and why?

[Nickster 836]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

We knew the day he got hurt that Mack was done as a Colt.

We knew the day the Colts drafted JT that Mack was in his last year as a Colt.  They weren't going to pay him the big money he would have commanded to play RB.

 

I think our chances of resigning him are higher now because there will likely be no market for an Achilles RB.  I don't think we are going to resign him, but could see giving him the minimum with incentives to see if he can contribute if other teams all pass. 

 

His dynamism (pre injury) is exactly what we need to go with JTs power IMO and presumably managments too when they drafted JT.

[Superman 9,214]

4 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Supe the Chiefs gave up 25 ppg and 388 ypg in the playoffs last year.  I mean you can't be completely incompetent, but all you need to be able to do when you have the Chiefs offense is HOLD Teams to FGs.

 

 

I agree with alot of what you are saying.  Here is what I am saying.  You need to keep the D resources at B level IMO and try to make the offense into an A level in today's NFL with today's rules.  

 

Their defense also made a lot of plays, without which they don't go to the SB. 

 

I don't understand where you're taking exception to what I'm saying. The Chiefs had the most potent offense in the NFL. Of course they were able to win with a B level defense (but give their defense the credit it deserves, it wasn't a bad defense). 

 

That's the exact point I'm making to begin with.

 

We clearly don't have the Chiefs offense. We likely won't have an A level offense with Rivers, because he's not going to be a dynamic passer at 39 years old. So if we bring him back, we need to make significant upgrades on defense. Because we're not a real contender without at least one side of the ball being better than it was in 2020.

[chad72 7,153]

14 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

IMO they aren't getting there with Rivers...and they aren't getting there without better weapons. KC was actually able to peak as a top 5 offense with Smith...but it wasn't until Mahomes took over that they were a serious threat. You really have to have both.

 

 

 

KC's issue was Bob Sutton. Mahomes was shut out vs the Patriots in the 2018 AFCCG first half and still managed to put up 30 points vs Belichick including a game tying drive to get them in FG range within a minute. But Brady never gave back the ball in OT. Yeah, the Dee Ford snafu game. Once they got Spagnuolos, they limited Titans to 20 points in the AFCCG and 49ers to 20 points in the SB last year. That gave an offense like that of the Chiefs the margin of error to survive 2 INTs in the SB as well. 

 

Right now, that team is the Bills, finding different ways to win games on O and D. That is what you need for the playoffs, a team with enough play makers on all sides that actually make plays come playoff time. Reggie Wayne made far more plays in the playoffs than Marvin Harrison, though Marvin was far more proficient in the regular season. It can't just be that Marvin was not doubled just for the playoffs, he saw double coverage in the regular season too. Your playmakers need to make plays come playoff time, period. Football is indeed the ultimate team game and Ballard's team building and emphasis on special teams is ahead of what Polian ever did, just need the O and D to elevate their play making come playoff time.

[shasta519 2,829]

12 minutes ago, Nickster said:

So yes like I said for like the 4th time.  Defense holds good teams to FGs while offense wins championships.

 

 

 

 

 

I think you all are making similar arguments here. Everybody wants a balanced team...but offense is the key differentiator.

 

In a perfect world...you would have a team that is top 5 in both offense and defense (like TB). But if I had the choice between a team with a top 5 offense/top 15 defense OR a top 5 defense/top 15 offense...the choice is pretty easy. Even a team with a top 5 defense/top 10 offense isn't going to beat that top 5 offense most of the time.

 

In this example...the first choices are GB and BUF...and the latter is IND or LAR. 

 

The key to defense is to have playmakers that can make big plays in a game and flip the field. But you have to have the offense to execute and score points. That's what it comes down to. Of course scores are typically lower the further you go into the playoffs...possessions become more important and teams eat more clock.

[Superman 9,214]

5 minutes ago, Nickster said:

 

So Supe,  I think from reading your opinions over various topics, I know how you will answer this.

 

If you could only improve one or the other, the Colts D or O, which would you improve and why?  You have to generalize here, don't be specific, by that I mean talking specific moves.

 

Given Colts D is B and Colts O is B (which I concur on BTW)'  If you could only improve one to try to win a championship, which would it be and why?

 

The offense, for sure, because I think we're basically a dynamic passer away from being a top 5ish offense, and can stay that way for several years if we get the right guy. Having a great QB means you always have the potential to be a top 5ish offense.

 

I still want us to have a better pass rush, at a minimum.