Superbowl - takeaways

[DougDew]

26 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

David was another example I was going to use. But he's 5 years older than Leonard...and signed his second contract in 2015. That deal was 5/$50M...when salary cap was $143M. So it will have grown about ~25% since then...so let's just say $13M in current AAV.

 

I cannot imagine a scenario where Leonard signs for $13M/year. 

 

I do agree that having (2) athletic talented LBs is key. I even wanted to draft Fred Warner even when they had drafted Leonard. And I was really excited about the prospect of a Leonard/Oke combo...but Oke wasn't very good this season. And if you watch a LB group like David/White...the Colts LBs don't seem on that level.

 

So as crazy it sounds...you might even have to add ILB to the list of team needs in a season or two (if Oke doesn't take a big step forward).

 

 

Not crazy at all.  In mock draft scenarios over the past couple of weeks, I've been toying with the idea of getting a Willis/Leonard hybrid ILB.  Do away with Oke and Walker types.  Not sure how that impacts run defense, but contesting the middle pass routes is what we've been lacking for years, despite what scheme/coaching we've had.

[throwing BBZ]

    The best thng we can do for our roster and staff is to give it a great running game.
 Reading up on Trent Williams, he is the biggest difference maker that may be available come FA.
I really enjoyed the commercials. Will Farrell, Tracy Morgan, The Mannings Dorita ones in particular.

[shasta519]

36 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Hughes was picked in 2010, AC was picked in 2011, and was the last first rounder of the Polian era. 

 

I think Hughes had a problem with the Colts, based on some comments he made after he was traded. But they picked Werner in 2013, then traded Hughes a couple months later. If Werner becomes a good pass rusher, maybe we don't feel it as much, but still, why not keep your good young pass rushers?

 

As it turns out, Werner was awful. Hughes didn't become a HOFer, but was definitely better than Werner, and is still in the league more than five years after Werner retired. 

 

I think Grigson had a good first year. After that, he made very few good decisions, IMO. Maybe ironically, his last first round pick was pretty good.

 

The Hughes trade was a big whiff on Grigs' part. But there could have been underlying issues that we weren't privy to. I thought he flashed in 2012...in his one season in Pagano's 3-4...and he two years left on his rookie deal (including 5th year option). Cheap pass rushing depth is not something you just trade away...at least not for a run-stuffing ILB. But it might have been an inevitable thing, given his attitude toward the team.

 

Grigs did a good job keeping pieces in place...like AC, Hilton, Davis, etc. Not easy to have a franchise LT, CB1 and WR1 all under contract...and then have to pay your franchise QB top tier money as well...and still have good cap space. That might have been Bluem...but Grigs was still his boss at the time. I think Hughes was really the only one that got away...then again...there weren't many core players being drafted during that time haha.

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, shasta519 said:

 

The Hughes trade was a big whiff on Grigs' part. But there could have been underlying issues that we weren't privy to. I thought he flashed in 2012...in his one season in Pagano's 3-4...and he two years left on his rookie deal (including 5th year option). Cheap pass rushing depth is not something you just trade away...at least not for a run-stuffing ILB. But it might have been an inevitable thing, given his attitude toward the team.

 

Grigs did a good job keeping pieces in place...like AC, Hilton, Davis, etc. Not easy to have a franchise LT, CB1 and WR1 all under contract...and then have to pay your franchise QB top tier money as well...and still have good cap space. That might have been Bluem...but Grigs was still his boss at the time. I think Hughes was really the only one that got away...then again...there weren't many core players being drafted during that time haha.

Interesting that you say cheap pass rushing depth is not something you just trade away. 
 

I agree. 
 

But there are plenty here who would happily personally drive Lewis, Turay and Benagu to any other NFL city.   They can’t wait to be rid of them.   They either don’t know the Hughes story and should,  or they do know it and don’t care.   No matter that Ballard often says it takes young pass rushers time to figure it out.    It gets old and tiring. 

[shasta519]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Not crazy at all.  In mock draft scenarios over the past couple of weeks, I've been toying with the idea of getting a Willis/Leonard hybrid ILB.  Do away with Oke and Walker types.  Not sure how that impacts run defense, but contesting the middle pass routes is what we've been lacking for years, despite what scheme/coaching we've had.

 

Yeah...I have always been in favor of having an athletic LB/S hybrid at OLB. 

 

Leonard himself isn't really your typical LBer. He's built like a big WR with long arms. In a perfect world, you could actually move Leonard to MLB and then replace him at WILL with an even more athletic version. 

 

I just would love to have a Devin White or Devin Bush type. 

[The Fish]

15 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

He just needs to retire for a couple of years and come back and win 3 SBs. Then I will put him on the same level as Jordan. People forget how hard it was that MJ did. 

Oh come on, that's not apples to apples even kind of. Brady is 43. Jordan came back with the Wizards around 40 and did nothing other than create a Jeopardy! question.

[DougDew]

2 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Yeah...I have always been in favor of having an athletic LB/S hybrid at OLB. 

 

Leonard himself isn't really your typical LBer. He's built like a big WR with long arms. In a perfect world, you could actually move Leonard to MLB and then replace him at WILL with an even more athletic version. 

 

I just would love to have a Devin White or Devin Bush type. 

Yes.  Leonard should be Mike.  Willis should be WILL....if he could add a few pounds.  JMO.

 

Edit:  Willis would not be a great WILL, but he s/b WILL more than he s/b SS.

[Superman]

1 minute ago, shasta519 said:

 

The Hughes trade was a big whiff on Grigs' part. But there could have been underlying issues that we weren't privy to. I thought he flashed in 2012...in his one season in Pagano's 3-4...and he two years left on his rookie deal (including 5th year option). Cheap pass rushing depth is not something you just trade away...at least not for a run-stuffing ILB. But it might have been an inevitable thing, given his attitude toward the team.

 

Grigs did a good job keeping pieces in place...like AC, Hilton, Davis, etc. Not easy to have a franchise LT, CB1 and WR1 all under contract...and then have to pay your franchise QB top tier money as well...and still have good cap space. That might have been Bluem...but Grigs was still his boss at the time. I think Hughes was really the only one that got away...then again...there weren't many core players being drafted during that time haha.

 

Polian left him an old, tattered roster that needed to be remade, and he got off to a good start in 2012. Not a lot of players to be paid at that time.

 

As for cap space, we had five highly paid players on the roster as of 2016 -- Luck, Davis (sort of), Hilton, AC, and Dwayne Allen. There were some moderately paid guys like Trent Cole, but for the most part, not a lot of money was being spent on really good players. That's mostly due to the fact that we whiffed on most of our draft picks between 2013-2015, and only signed second tier guys in FA (despite the narrative that Grigson spent a ton of money in FA, which was never quite accurate). 

 

So he paid his best players, but he only had four of five of them worthy of big extensions, and no one else to spend money on. That's why we're still in pretty good cap shape. Ballard's first draft class has proved to be underwhelming, and none of them are going to get big extensions (besides Stewart), so the only FAs we really want to keep are older vets. 

 

And that's why, like you said earlier, I wonder if a reset isn't in order at this point. We don't have a franchise QB, we have question marks at three other critical positions (LT, DE, CB), and we're talking about trading a high pick for a retread QB. We're also coming up on big deals for Leonard and Nelson, who are very deserving, but it feels like we're treading water if we don't make significant upgrades at other spots.

[Superman]

Also, think about comp picks.

 

Brissett, Walker, Hooker, Rhodes, Hilton, Autry, Houston, Clark, Mack, all could bring back 4th to 6th round comp picks in 2022. 

[shasta519]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

Interesting that you say cheap pass rushing depth is not something you just trade away. 
 

I agree. 
 

But there are plenty here who would happily personally drive Lewis, Turay and Benagu to any other NFL city.   They can’t wait to be rid of them.   They either don’t know the Hughes story and should,  or they do know it and don’t care.   No matter that Ballard often says it takes young pass rushers time to figure it out.    It gets old and tiring. 

 

At that time...I feel like the Colts were far more devoid of pass rushing depth than they are now (even if that depth hasn't panned out yet). They had Mathis and nobody else. I had look up their depth chart from March of 2013 to even recall any of the players.

 

If people are looking to trade one of those guys it's probably because they think the return will be worth something...not just to get rid of them. In Hughes' case...all they got back was a less athletic two-down ILB. It was just a poor value exchange. I don't think anybody would want to trade Lewis/Banogu for a guy like Germaine Pratt.

[chad72]

12 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Oh come on, that's not apples to apples even kind of. Brady is 43. Jordan came back with the Wizards around 40 and did nothing other than create a Jeopardy! question.

 

Jordan retired from the Bulls for a couple of years, did you forget? 

[shasta519]

12 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Polian left him an old, tattered roster that needed to be remade, and he got off to a good start in 2012. Not a lot of players to be paid at that time.

 

As for cap space, we had five highly paid players on the roster as of 2016 -- Luck, Davis (sort of), Hilton, AC, and Dwayne Allen. There were some moderately paid guys like Trent Cole, but for the most part, not a lot of money was being spent on really good players. That's mostly due to the fact that we whiffed on most of our draft picks between 2013-2015, and only signed second tier guys in FA (despite the narrative that Grigson spent a ton of money in FA, which was never quite accurate). 

 

So he paid his best players, but he only had four of five of them worthy of big extensions, and no one else to spend money on. That's why we're still in pretty good cap shape. Ballard's first draft class has proved to be underwhelming, and none of them are going to get big extensions (besides Stewart), so the only FAs we really want to keep are older vets. 

 

And that's why, like you said earlier, I wonder if a reset isn't in order at this point. We don't have a franchise QB, we have question marks at three other critical positions (LT, DE, CB), and we're talking about trading a high pick for a retread QB. We're also coming up on big deals for Leonard and Nelson, who are very deserving, but it feels like we're treading water if we don't make significant upgrades at other spots.

 

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

Also, think about comp picks.

 

Brissett, Walker, Hooker, Rhodes, Hilton, Autry, Houston, Clark, Mack, all could bring back 4th to 6th round comp picks in 2022. 

 

I think there could be more to this. 

 

[The Fish]

2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Jordan retired from the Bulls for a couple of years, did you forget? 

Yes, of course I forgot the most iconic retirement in pro sports. This is the second time today I've had this leveled at me.. lol.. 

 

I addressed that anyway. It doesn't factor into my math, at all. Brady is 43, on win 7 of 10. 43.

[DougDew]

18 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Grigs did a good job keeping pieces in place...like AC, Hilton, Davis, etc. Not easy to have a franchise LT, CB1 and WR1 all under contract...and then have to pay your franchise QB top tier money as well...and still have good cap space. That might have been Bluem...but Grigs was still his boss at the time. I think Hughes was really the only one that got away...then again...there weren't many core players being drafted during that time haha.

Looking back, Grigs approach fit the win now mode more than what Ballard is doing.  Grigs had more of an immediate win now opportunity than Ballard has, notably because the AFC South was so poor back then and we had Luck.  Drafting core players may not have been as high of a priority as it is with Ballard, nit that Grigs would have been good at it.

 

Grigs gave up a second for a nice #1 CB, and gave up a #1 for what everyone thought was a young core player RB.  He whiffed on Werner, but whiffing on just one draft pick is not a problem.  Grigs had nothing to show for three 1st round picks after the TR, Werner, and Dorsett investments.  His mid round picks were not bad, but none them ever stepped up to play above their draft slot.

 

I think Ballard needs to do some shuffling of the young talent we have on defense and reset drafting some of the positions he has already addressed several times, notably, corner, S, and edge.  I'm all for including any or all of our young 2nd and mid round defensive players drafted in the past few years in a trade for a good QB.  Most of those young players will not be part of our core, and won't see a second contract anyway, IMO.

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, Chickee said:

To get a comp pick does the player just need to be signed by another team, or be on the roster for a certain time?   What makes the difference between getting a 4th to getting a 6th?   Thanks

 

https://overthecap.com/the-basics-and-methodology-of-projecting-the-nfls-compensatory-draft-picks/

 

That link is the best breakdown I've seen. To answer your questions, a player needs to be signed by a certain date for a certain amount of money to even qualify for the comp pick formula. He also has to be on the team at least until the season starts. The determining factor for what round comp pick he might account for is basically the value of the contract he signs with the new team.

[stitches]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I saw your post and assumed you were exaggerating. But I just saw this stat, and wow. 497 yards scrambling.

This is the only graph and info you really need to know why TB won this game. Yes, playmaking out of structure is good to have but you cannot win by just that or when your predetermined play is getting destroyed before your QB can even count to 1 Mississippi. No rhythm whatsoever, nothing within structure or by plan... This had nothing to do with Mahomes or any perceived failings with him. This was all on KC's OLine inability to secure any sort of opportunity for their play callers to call a structured game or for their QB to play in anything but complete chaos.

 

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, stitches said:

This is the only graph and info you really need to know why TB won this game. Yes, playmaking out of structure is good to have but you cannot win by just that or when your predetermined play is getting destroyed before your QB can even count to 1 Mississippi. No rhythm whatsoever, nothing within structure or by plan... This had nothing to do with Mahomes or any perceived failings with him. This was all on KC's OLine inability to secure any sort of opportunity for their play callers to call a structured game or for their QB to play in anything but complete chaos.

 

 

They could have adjusted their play calling some, but they couldn't even run a screen correctly. 

[shasta519]

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

And that's why, like you said earlier, I wonder if a reset isn't in order at this point. We don't have a franchise QB, we have question marks at three other critical positions (LT, DE, CB), and we're talking about trading a high pick for a retread QB. We're also coming up on big deals for Leonard and Nelson, who are very deserving, but it feels like we're treading water if we don't make significant upgrades at other spots.

 

10 minutes ago, Superman said:

Also, think about comp picks.

 

Brissett, Walker, Hooker, Rhodes, Hilton, Autry, Houston, Clark, Mack, all could bring back 4th to 6th round comp picks in 2022. 

 

I agree. To expand...I think this team is at a crossroads of sorts. And I absolutely wouldn't put it past Ballard to have a reset year in order to properly set up the competitive window with a young QB. 

 

Q, Leonard and Smith are very deserving...but it's still just more cap space going to the same talent on the team. It doesn't make them any better.

 

And if they add a vet QB already under contract (or negotiate a new deal)...they are probably tapped out at that point (and possibly even out a couple of good draft picks).

 

So after doing these moves...it will be very difficult to upgrade the team. Which means they will compete...but they won't contend. Like you said...it's treading water...or a lateral move. 

 

As for comp picks...I think Ballard has been eyeing this offseason for comp picks. Unfortunately...guys got hurt...which will impact their contracts. But the sheer volume of players will ensure the Colts should get a few comp picks if they let most of them walk.

 

And at the same time, I think Ballard could be very active in players that get released due to cap constraints (which could be unlike we have seen before). That won't affect the compo formula.

 

I also think those comp picks could be vital to replenish the draft capital they will lose from moving up...if Ballard goes that route. They also could help balance out the cap space being spent on players they acquire via FA...as long as they don't offset all of them with UFAs. 

 

I know Ballard loves his picks...but I think he will look to out-scout other teams on Day 3 to make up for the draft capital in a trade up.

 

So one theory includes a massive trade up to draft...a cheaper vet QB2...letting guys walk...and make an aggressive push in FA/trades to maximize a roster for the next 3-4 years. They will get a couple of comp picks...but not a lot...and will look to contend right away with a rookie QB.

 

The second theory is the same...except they aren't aggressive in FA. So they reap a lot of comp picks for 2022 and this becomes a reset year of sorts with more modest expectations. The 2022 offseason is when they will get aggressive in FA.

 

Door #3 is trading for Darnold...and putting a team around him right away. It's probably the easiest of the options...if the price is right...but it's very risky.

 

Door #4 is trading for Wentz...and it basically puts you back in the room you were in.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

Door #3 is trading for Darnold...and putting a team around him right away. It's probably the easiest of the options...if the price is right...but it's very risky.

 

I'd take gap year, with Eason and a vet, even JB, before I'd spend any real assets on Darnold. Maybe Eason does something and we have a good QB already.

 

I'm more interested in Wentz than anyone else, it seems. The money makes the rest of the roster a question mark.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, DEFENSE said:

yes it seems belichick was not the reason they won, but it was brady making good qb decisions

You’re kidding, right?    Please say you’re kidding?    Maybe sarcasm?    
 

Otherwise....    I feel an Oh, Dear God coming on!      

[stitches]

10 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'd take gap year, with Eason and a vet, even JB, before I'd spend any real assets on Darnold. Maybe Eason does something and we have a good QB already.

 

I'm more interested in Wentz than anyone else, it seems. The money makes the rest of the roster a question mark.

I'm interested in Wentz too. Just not for what's being reported as asking price(2 firsts? 1st and 2 starters... HELL NO!). I would much rather trade up in the draft for one of the top 4 QBs than give them for the privillege of paying Wentz his contract. 

[DougDew]

18 minutes ago, stitches said:

This is the only graph and info you really need to know why TB won this game. Yes, playmaking out of structure is good to have but you cannot win by just that or when your predetermined play is getting destroyed before your QB can even count to 1 Mississippi. No rhythm whatsoever, nothing within structure or by plan... This had nothing to do with Mahomes or any perceived failings with him. This was all on KC's OLine inability to secure any sort of opportunity for their play callers to call a structured game or for their QB to play in anything but complete chaos.

 

That's the second half.  The first half was dominated by TBs offense keeping the ball and scoring.  Then Reid calling 2 timeouts to help TB drive the field.  

 

KCs O did not possess the ball that much in the first half.  But it drove the field twice, settling two FGs.

 

The second half was different, and many teams look the way KC looked when the D pins their ears back and pass rushes.

 

I wonder how many running plays KC called.  CEH had some nice runs in the first half.

 

KCs D could not stop Tampa, and KCs O played like it.

[aaron11]

The Wentz situation is a weird one.  Are the Eagles giving up on him?  It kind of seems that way, which means a trade should be small.

 

Asking two firsts for a player they benched and dont want anymore is pretty optimistic 

[stitches]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That's the second half.  The first half was dominated by TBs offense keeping the ball and scoring.  Then Reid calling 2 timeouts to help TB drive the field.  

 

KCs O did not possess the ball that much in the first half.  But it drove the field twice, settling two FGs.

 

The second half was different, and many teams look the way KC looked when the D pins their ears back and pass rushes.

 

I wonder how many running plays KC called.  CEH had some nice runs in the first half.

 

KCs D could not stop Tampa, and KCs O played like it.

Yeah... at some points I thought they need to call more runs, just because it was so impossible for Mahomes to get clean pocket in the passing game like... ever. I haven't seen the stats but he must have faced pressure on something like.... 50-60-65%? of his drop backs? 

 

But I also kind of understand Reid. The game script kind of forced him to be even more pass-happy. They were trailing big and they have the ultimate trailing big QB in Mahomes who chews this type of deficits like they are nothing... just... this time nothing was working and Mahomes had no shot whatsoever in completing a comeback with this sort of pressure in his face all game long. 

[shasta519]

48 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Looking back, Grigs approach fit the win now mode more than what Ballard is doing.  Grigs had more of an immediate win now opportunity than Ballard has, notably because the AFC South was so poor back then and we had Luck.  Drafting core players may not have been as high of a priority as it is with Ballard, nit that Grigs would have been good at it.

 

Grigs gave up a second for a nice #1 CB, and gave up a #1 for what everyone thought was a young core player RB.  He whiffed on Werner, but whiffing on just one draft pick is not a problem.  Grigs had nothing to show for three 1st round picks after the TR, Werner, and Dorsett investments.  His mid round picks were not bad, but none them ever stepped up to play above their draft slot.

 

I think Ballard needs to do some shuffling of the young talent we have on defense and reset drafting some of the positions he has already addressed several times, notably, corner, S, and edge.  I'm all for including any or all of our young 2nd and mid round defensive players drafted in the past few years in a trade for a good QB.  Most of those young players will not be part of our core, and won't see a second contract anyway, IMO.

 

Yeah...you hardly ever see the Vontae Davis trade mentioned. That was Grigs' first year...and that move solidified CB1 for the next few years. Ballard has thrown (2) 2nd rounders at the position over the span of 4 years...and it's still an issue. 

 

This is why I am a big proponent of trading for young talent...if it makes sense.

 

But the mindset/approach for Ballard and Grigs were just very different. Grigs was not nearly as good as talent evaluation...but he also didn't have the same amount of draft capital to find core players and build through the draft. His best draft asset went to replace the franchise QB that they had planned to let go of anyways. He didn't get to parlay it into several more draft picks. What he got was cap space...and he was charged with using it to win now. It didn't work out as well as we hoped...but those first 3 Luck years were great.

 

 

[DougDew]

Just now, stitches said:

Yeah... at some points I thought they need to call more runs, just because it was so impossible for Mahomes to get clean pocket in the passing game like... ever. I haven't seen the stats but he must have faced pressure on something like.... 50-60-65%? of his drop backs? 

 

But I also kind of understand Reid. The game script kind of forced him to be even more pass-happy. They were trailing big and they have the ultimate trailing big QB in Mahomes who chews this type of deficits like they are nothing... just... this time nothing was working and Mahomes had no shot whatsoever in completing a comeback with this sort of pressure in his face all game long. 

I'm sure the injured oline played a part, but at least some of that pressure was after Mahomes was ready to throw and pumped like nobody was open, then pulled it down.

 

I hope somebody does an autopsy on the game, but I'd bet Tampa's back seven played as good a game covering KCs receivers than I have ever seen a back seven play against them. 

 

Usually, when Mahomes escapes, Hill or Kelce get wide open.  Even when Kelce was targeted, a LB was there to break it up.  Hill had like 2 catches midway through the 3rd quarter...and no reverses or sweeps at all. 

 

It really looked like the game plan was simply "Ok Patrick, go make something happen."

[chad72]

15 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Yeah...you hardly ever see the Vontae Davis trade mentioned. That was Grigs' first year...and that move solidified CB1 for the next few years. Ballard has thrown (2) 2nd rounders at the position over the span of 4 years...and it's still an issue. 

 

This is why I am a big proponent of trading for young talent...if it makes sense.

 

But the mindset/approach for Ballard and Grigs were just very different. Grigs was not nearly as good as talent evaluation...but he also didn't have the same amount of draft capital to find core players and build through the draft. His best draft asset went to replace the franchise QB that they had planned to let go of anyways. He didn't get to parlay it into several more draft picks. What he got was cap space...and he was charged with using it to win now. It didn't work out as well as we hoped...but those first 3 Luck years were great.

 

 

 

I did mention Lattimore for a 2nd rounder a while ago?? 

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'm sure the injured oline played a part, but at least some of that pressure was after Mahomes was ready to throw and pumped like nobody was open, then pulled it down.

 

I hope somebody does an autopsy on the game, but I'd bet Tampa's back seven played as good a game covering KCs receivers than I have ever seen a back seven play against them. 

 

Usually, when Mahomes escapes, Hill or Kelce get wide open.  Even when Kelce was targeted, a LB was there to break it up.  Hill had like 2 catches midway through the 3rd quarter...and no reverses or sweeps at all. 

 

It really looked like the game plan was simply "Ok Patrick, go make something happen."

Tampa has some great young CBs. Jamel Dean ( only reason he fell IMO were his injuries ), Carlton Davis, Sean Bunting... Those are all second and third rounders. What a great job by their FO filling up some of the most important positions in football with great talent outside of R1. Winfield is going to be really good too. 

 

[chad72]

17 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'm sure the injured oline played a part, but at least some of that pressure was after Mahomes was ready to throw and pumped like nobody was open, then pulled it down.

 

I hope somebody does an autopsy on the game, but I'd bet Tampa's back seven played as good a game covering KCs receivers than I have ever seen a back seven play against them. 

 

Usually, when Mahomes escapes, Hill or Kelce get wide open.  Even when Kelce was targeted, a LB was there to break it up.  Hill had like 2 catches midway through the 3rd quarter...and no reverses or sweeps at all. 

 

It really looked like the game plan was simply "Ok Patrick, go make something happen."

 

One year, when Mahomes is well protected, we clamor for guys like Hill and Kelce. The next year, when Mahomes is not protected, we clamor for OL significance.

 

Bottom line, when you have the OL and the QB, even if the QB doesn't have the Hill or Kelce kinds, the kind of investment we have made in Pittman and JT should come through as long as the QB is protected to spread it around with a balanced play calling as long as you make more of such investments. You never know what kind of game plan you will need - run it 40 times or throw it 40 times, so you have plans for extra inline TEs and OL to run it down a D's throat or plans for extra WRs and pass catchers to spread the D out. 

 

This has also been shown by Brady not having first round investments like Harrison and Wayne and still being able to put up points in the regular season and playoffs. However, you do at least need Day 2 (Rounds 2 or 3) investments consistently on skill positions to replenish the young pass catching group, IMO, and the hit rate is better with skill positions with early investments.

[colts8718]

Half time was horrible 

[Superman]

1 minute ago, chad72 said:

One year, when Mahomes is well protected, we clamor for guys like Hill and Kelce. The next year, when Mahomes is not protected, we clamor for OL significance.

 

Anyone acting like this game is in anyway a referendum on Mahomes is selling something.

[chad72]

Just now, Superman said:

 

Anyone acting like this game is in anyway a referendum on Mahomes is selling something.

 

Yep. Weaknesses were magnified (OL backups) to the point that strengths were minimized (Hill and Kelce).

[aaron11]

9 minutes ago, colts8718 said:

Half time was horrible 

I do like the Weeknd but I had been wondering if he would bring the right energy to the super bowl half time show.  I didint hate it but it wasnt anything special either 

 

The majority of his music is low key, almost R & B like.   That was a weird fit for a big production of a half time show

[shasta519]

38 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'm sure the injured oline played a part, but at least some of that pressure was after Mahomes was ready to throw and pumped like nobody was open, then pulled it down.

 

I hope somebody does an autopsy on the game, but I'd bet Tampa's back seven played as good a game covering KCs receivers than I have ever seen a back seven play against them. 

 

Usually, when Mahomes escapes, Hill or Kelce get wide open.  Even when Kelce was targeted, a LB was there to break it up.  Hill had like 2 catches midway through the 3rd quarter...and no reverses or sweeps at all. 

 

It really looked like the game plan was simply "Ok Patrick, go make something happen."

 

They were getting pressure with 4...which allowed them to double Hill and Kelce. Also...nobody stepped up. Williams dropped a TD...Robinson dropped a TD. Nothing worked. And it seemed like Mahome was hesitating a lot.

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

They were getting pressure with 4...which allowed them to double Hill and Kelce. Also...nobody stepped up. Williams dropped a TD...Robinson dropped a TD. Nothing worked. And it seemed like Mahome was hesitating a lot.

But pocket pressure is generally irrelevant to KC.  They don't make plays from the pocket.  Stopping Hill and Kelce from being their typical wide open selves is what happened.  The oline injuries were a problem, but I think the back seven game plan and execution was the key to stopping KC.

 

Mahomes put some passes on the money.  Some were dropped, but there were more passes tipped and knocked down by a defender than I ever remember seeing in a KC game.  Kelce got his typical wide open with nobody within 7 yards of him a few times, but not very many times.

[MPStack]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Interesting that you say cheap pass rushing depth is not something you just trade away. 
 

I agree. 
 

But there are plenty here who would happily personally drive Lewis, Turay and Benagu to any other NFL city.   They can’t wait to be rid of them.   They either don’t know the Hughes story and should,  or they do know it and don’t care.   No matter that Ballard often says it takes young pass rushers time to figure it out.    It gets old and tiring. 

I’m one of them and I’m sorry, but I expect more out of 2nd picks. Waiting 4 years for players to develop is not what you use 1st or 2nd Rd picks for. That’s for later Rd picks, and teams like the Ravens and Patriots do it well. (Edge players at least) 

I don’t expect Ballard to hit on every pick, but I kinda agree with a comment @EastStreetmade, that Ballard got to cute drafting guys like Turay and Banogu. 
 

I think Ballard walks on water with some of the fan base, but he has had his share of “whiffs”. 

However, he’s still done more good than bad. 

 

[compuls1v3]

1 hour ago, colts8718 said:

Half time was horrible 

I thought the sound quality was terrible.  Some of the light effects were cool, but the sound was garbage IMHO.  It's like they didn't have an audio output to the broadcasting, and was just recording with a webcam mic or something.  I expected better.

[Fluke_33]

1 hour ago, colts8718 said:

Half time was horrible 

the weak end.

[stitches]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

And that's why, like you said earlier, I wonder if a reset isn't in order at this point. We don't have a franchise QB, we have question marks at three other critical positions (LT, DE, CB), and we're talking about trading a high pick for a retread QB. We're also coming up on big deals for Leonard and Nelson, who are very deserving, but it feels like we're treading water if we don't make significant upgrades at other spots.

I see you've come around to my position. I think it's very likely next year we will take a step back pretty much whatever we do at QB exactly because we will likely not have the high end resources to address all of the starters at positions of imprtance from last year. We cannot both spend high end capital for QB AND get a good LT... and TWO good DEs... AND 2 good CBs... AND replace TY(or get him back) AND replace/resign Burton and Alie-Cox AND find LB depth if we lose Walker. There are just way too many positions that need addressing to get to even the level we were last year. 

 

So... if we are taking a step back either way... why not do it with a young QB who is going to be at least financially cheap for the next 4-5 years, which will give you some room to play with the other positions on the team? That's why IMO getting one of the top QBs in the draft makes most sense. 

 

But that's after we lost on the Stafford stakes... so... let me step back and ask you then - had we won them(lets say we gave up 21+2022 1st.)... Do you think there was a realistic way for us to get to a team that's significantly better than the one we had last year? 

[John Hammonds]

Ok, I'm going to get away from the "what does our roster look like?  what should we do in the draft? what mistakes did Polian make? what mistakes did Grigson make?" trend of this thread, and get back to the OP question:  What are my takeaways from the superbowl?

 

I think that the MVP should not have gone to Tom Brady.  It should have gone to the Bucs' defensive coordinator.  Can you even give an MVP to an assistant coach?  In this case, it should have been.

 

He crafted a masterful defense to stop KC.  Blanket Hill.  Use your #1 run defense to stop the run and limit Mahomes when he runs outside.  Use your natural advantage to pass rush with just four guys against their backup/displaced offensive line.  Mahomes' only options were to his 2nd read (usually Kelsey) and 3rd read (Sammy Watkins/Byron Pringle).  And with the Bucs' pass rush, Mahomes never had time to get to his 3rd read.  He barely had a second and a half before he was flushed from the pocket and had to run.

The Bucs offense scored 31 points.  So?  Normally, KC would beat that any day.  But not this day.  Not against this defense.

 

MVP should have gone to Todd Bowles.