Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Offensive Asst. Kevin Patullo to the Eagles


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Interesting. Leaving after we created a position for him and moved him out of WRs, to go and take on a similar job. 

 

I'm going to bet Philly's new O will look a lot less conservative than Indy's.

Which..... is a good thing. Kind of had to be conservative with the previous 2 QBs though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Interesting. Leaving after we created a position for him and moved him out of WRs, to go and take on a similar job. 

 

I'm going to bet Philly's new O will look a lot less conservative than Indy's.

looks like Ballard's and Reich's rolodexes will really get a workout in the next few weeks.....maybe they should poach 1 or 2 guys from Detroit.....or Green Bay

 

just in case...."something" happens between now and March

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Rivers was top 10ish in most core stats. If anything, we were overly conservative with Rivers. 


Yes he was, he played well. I’m just saying he def has some major limitations. Mainly Mobility/Arm Strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Rivers was top 10ish in most core stats. If anything, we were overly conservative with Rivers. 

 

I think Frank and the OC knew his strengths and weaknesses and didn't put in too many plays that they knew Rivers would have a hard time executing.  They did let him take a deep(ish) shot sometimes.  I'm not sure they were overly conservative at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Shive changed the title to Offensive Asst. Kevin Patullo to the Eagles
3 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Coaches getting poached from us is worrisome. I hope it doesn’t mean there was some internal strife going on. 


I don’t think so. They were all viewed as good candidates for promotions.

 

Was surprised about the Sirianni Eagles hire but they wanted a little piece of Reich back.. And Sirianni is going to being familiar faces with him such as Gannon.
 

Some guys just want to take that first opportunity to become a head coach.

 

I hope Flus doesn’t leave. That will sting the most. If Flus does go to Houston then that seems weird... They are a train wreck and he has been picky about job openings in previous offseasons...

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Rivers was top 10ish in most core stats. If anything, we were overly conservative with Rivers. 

 

For some reason, I feel like most fans, that we underachieved with 11-5 having the easiest schedule in the NFL, should have been 12 or 13 wins and a home playoff game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

 

For some reason, I feel like most fans, that we underachieved with 11-5 having the easiest schedule in the NFL, should have been 12 or 13 wins and a home playoff game.

Could have been worse.  Both Houston games were headed to the L column and the GB game could easily have flipped.  Just looking at 11-5 doesnt really tell the whole story IMO.  We were lucky (literally) to achieve that record.

 

Definitely underachieved (or didnt capitalize) in the Buffalo game, but in hindsight it doesn't seem like that was out of character for this past years squad.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, poilucelt said:

looks like Ballard's and Reich's rolodexes will really get a workout in the next few weeks.....maybe they should poach 1 or 2 guys from Detroit.....or Green Bay

 

just in case...."something" happens between now and March

IDK. I think we're pretty conservative on the coaching side of things. Wouldn't expect much in that category. Only thing that might bring a decently big move is losing Flus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, bravo4460 said:


Yes he was, he played well. I’m just saying he def has some major limitations. Mainly Mobility/Arm Strength.

I agree on the limitations, but point is, he played very well (better than I expected), and was held back IMO by a very conservative offense. We saw some great moments and some great passing from him at times when either Reich opened things up, or we were down and there wasn't much choice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

I think Frank and the OC knew his strengths and weaknesses and didn't put in too many plays that they knew Rivers would have a hard time executing.  They did let him take a deep(ish) shot sometimes.  I'm not sure they were overly conservative at all.

Rivers was like #6 in deep shot accuracy, yet bottom half in deep shot attempts. I think they were very conservative with him. You don't have to have a gun necessarily to go deep, if you're "throwing to a spot" with pass catchers you trust to run the right route, or go up and get the ball. Rivers was pretty successful when allowed to do that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

For some reason, I feel like most fans, that we underachieved with 11-5 having the easiest schedule in the NFL, should have been 12 or 13 wins and a home playoff game.

I totally think we underachieved. We should have won vs Jax (horrible game plan). We should have won vs Pitt (horrible adjustments and late game strategy). We should have been 13-3 and #2 position in the playoffs. But that has nothing to do with Rivers. It was all coaching. If not for those two mistakes, I would have expected us to be playing KC yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Rivers was like #6 in deep shot accuracy, yet bottom half in deep shot attempts. I think they were very conservative with him. You don't have to have a gun necessarily to go deep, if you're "throwing to a spot" with pass catchers you trust to run the right route, or go up and get the ball. Rivers was pretty successful when allowed to do that. 


I'm not putting Rivers down, or necessarily disagreeing with you.  But his high rating in deep shot accuracy was most likely because they were so conservative with him.  Only taking shots when there was the right opportunity.  And those opportunities were limited because of his abilities.  

 

It’s kind of a moot point now anyway.  I’m on to Cincinnati...er, I mean Stafford.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Smonroe said:


I'm not putting Rivers down, or necessarily disagreeing with you.  But his high rating in deep shot accuracy was most likely because they were so conservative with him.  Only taking shots when there was the right opportunity.  And those opportunities were limited because of his abilities.  

 

It’s kind of a moot point now anyway.  I’m on to Cincinnati...er, I mean Stafford.  

 

IMO, the deep shot frequency was head scratching. The timing was either really weird, or when down and we had no choice. Those sail routes to MAC vs MN were picture perfect, and we never saw them again. We also saw some very well timed routes to Pascal that we never saw again. 

 

Bottom line, if you're #6 in accuracy, you take more shots. Simple as that. If there was a reason to be conservative, it's more the lack of decent size and fast options as pass catchers. I was surprised we didn't see some shot to Pittman later in the year when he was coming on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

 

IMO, the deep shot frequency was head scratching. The timing was either really weird, or when down and we had no choice. Those sail routes to MAC vs MN were picture perfect, and we never saw them again. We also saw some very well timed routes to Pascal that we never saw again. 

 

Bottom line, if you're #6 in accuracy, you take more shots. Simple as that. If there was a reason to be conservative, it's more the lack of decent size and fast options as pass catchers. I was surprised we didn't see some shot to Pittman later in the year when he was coming on.

I suspect Reich (& Ballard) drafted Campbell assuming he'd be their main deep threat; maybe he will be in 2021 if he can stay healthy,

 

Or maybe CB signs some UFA receiver like Agholor, Fuller, etc. Think guys like Godwin and Robinson may be too pricey, particularly if Ballard's contemplating signing another UFA to play left (or right) tackle.

 

Gonna get interesting watching what Green Bay does with Rodgers, and what approach Lynch takes re: Rodgers and Stafford. Not to mention, where Watson ends up if he truly has had enough of Pastor E.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Interesting. Leaving after we created a position for him and moved him out of WRs, to go and take on a similar job. 

 

I'm going to bet Philly's new O will look a lot less conservative than Indy's.

Probably getting a raise. Most of us would leave for a better opportunity. Coaching is a brutal profession. Got to strike while the iron is hot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ColtJax said:

Nick Saban loses about 5 assistant coaches a year and never misses a beat. If the head coach is a good coach the team winds.

I don’t think it’s quite that simple.   Saban  is a great coach, no question.   But he also has enough money to hire former NFL coaches, some of them former head coaches.   In short, he can hire the best staff money can buy.   Saban can get almost any player in the country into Alabama.  Rare is the player that the administration says “no” to Nick.  
 

Saban has more support than most any other coach in America.  That helps a lot.  Even for a great coach like Nick Saban. 

Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...