Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

2021 PFF post Game 3


EastStreet
 Share

Recommended Posts

Will try to keep this going every week with updates so we can follow along performance peaks and valleys
As always, if you don't like PFF... just don't click.. 

 

Keeping it simple
Rounding up
Under 50 - Red
Over 70 -  Blue


PFF grades are year to date
Snap count % are per game

 

Format 
Player - comments 
Snap count %
PFF grades (year to date, not per game)
 

 

 

QB Note - While not great, not bad at all given pressure/hits ranking

  • C Wentz QB - Still grading decent despite our OL woes.
    • 100% / 93% / 100% / 
    • 60.1 / 67.8 / 68.5 / 
  • J Eason QB - 
    • NA / 7% / NA / 
    • NA / 29.6 / NA / 
       

RB Note - I just don't get the usage %s

  • J Taylor RB - Better grade, still low usage. Less than Hines this game??
    • 55% / 45% / 48% / 
    • 60.3 / 60.5 / 64.1 / 
  • N Hines RB - Still grading solid, up from last game.
    • 45% / 37% / 56% / 
    • 69.6 / 60.9 / 67.9 / 
  • M Mack RB 
    • NA / 19% / NA / 
    • NA / 53.8 / NA / 
       

TE Note - I think the blocking needs (due to OL woes) is hurting this group

  • J Doyle TE
    • 59% / 70% / 57% / 
    • 64.7 / 71.2 / 68.1 / 
  • M Alie-Cox TE
    • 51% / 40% / 46% / 
    • 50.0 / 51.2 / 56.1 / 
  • K Granson TE
    • 9%  / 9% / 20% / 
    • NA / NA / NA / 
       

WR Note 

  • M Pittman WR - grades still trending up
    • 97% / 90% / 93% / 
    • 60.8 / 68.8 / 72.7
  • Z Pascal WR - down game for Zach. Leads the team in drops
    • 91% / 91% / 89% / 
    • 64.9 / 62.0 / 57.7
  • P Campbell WR - not the best game
    • 61% / NA / 80% / 
    • 62.6 / NA / 56.9 / 
  • M Strachan WR
    • 24% / 51% / NA / 
    • 75.2 / 62.3 / NA / 
  • A Dulin WR
    • 8% / 39% / 11% / 
    • NA / 59.5 / 58.6 / 
  • D Harris WR
    • NA / 3% / NA / 
    • NA / NA / NA / 
       

OL Note - Feel like 2020 Philly OL 

  • E Fisher LT - Played 100% this week, gave up 2 more sacks. Too fast?
    • NA / 73% / 100% / 
    • NA / 62.0 (1 Sack) / 54.1 (3 total sacks, not 3 in the game) / 
  • B Smith RT - need him back
    • 100% / NA / NA / 
    • 60.8 (1) / NA / NA / 
  • J Davenport T - bit better, still bad
    • 100% / 100% / 72% / 
    • 59.8 (2) / 43.0 (2) / 47.4 (2) / 
  • M Glowinski G - Guessing Smith's absence is impacting him big time
    • 100% / 100% / 100% / 
    • 50.7 / 45.3 / 43.4 (1) / 
  • Q Nelson G - Was trending better before injury
    • 100% / 100% / 21% / 
    • 72.7 / 63.9 / 69.3 / 
  • R Kelly C - still good, not great
    • 100% / 100% / 100% / 
    • 67.9 / 68.8 (1) / 68.2 (1)
  • M Pryor OT - would like to see his snap count increase, and less JD.
    • NA / 27% / 28% / 
    • NA / 62.3 / 66.5 / 
  • C Reed OG - Nice job stepping in for Q
    • NA / NA / 79% / 
    • NA / NA / 68.6 / 

 

 

iDL Note -  

  • D Buckner DT - doesn't seem to be himself this year so far.
    • 87% / 88% / 76% / 
    • 59.6 / 71.3 / 66.9 (1 total sack)
  • G Stewart NT - snap counts are decreasing, which I think is good. 75+ is too much for a NT
    • 81% / 75% / 69% / 
    • 62.9 / 66.9 / 65.8 / 
  • T Stallworth DT - 
    • 13% / 27% / NA / 
    • 44.2 / 39.4 / NA / 
  • C Williams - Not great, but not bad. 
    • NA / NA / 18% / 
    • NA / NA / 55.5 / 
  • A Woods - Like Williams, not great, but not Stallworth level bad.
    • NA / NA / 18% / 
    • NA / NA / 54.3 / 

 

DE Note - 

  • K Paye DE - still grading strong though limited snaps
    • 76% / 69% / 10% / 
    • 77.7 / 75.1 / 74.2
  • A Muhammad DE - Still very solid and consistent.
    • 70% / 61% / 78% / 
    • 68.0 (1)  / 67.7 (2) / 66.7 (2)
  • T Lewis DE - Huge grading uptick at the same time as his snaps go up. Need more Lewis.
    • 54% / 54% / 78% / 
    • 66.7 / 69.7 / 79.5
  • B Banogu DE - not a bad day
    • 11% / 7% / 19% / 
    • 54.1 / 59.5 / 60.2 / 
  • K Turay DE - Little better with the increased snap count. 
    • NA / 19% / 34% / 
    • NA / 44.4 / 49.5 / 
       

LB Note - 

  • B Okereke LB - need improvement. Grades still descending. Leads team in missed Ts
    • 100% / 100% / 100% / 
    • 58.3 / 57.4 / 53.1 / 
  • D Leonard LB - back to 70s, still need more given his pay
    • 100% / 100% / 100% / 
    • 71.3 / 69.5 / 70.1
  • Z Franklin LB
    • 24% / 5% / 31% / 
    • 52.9 / 58.9 / 50.3 / 
  • EJ Speed - decent day back from injury
    • NA / NA / 9% / 
    • NA / NA / 64.6 / 
       

CB Note - Rock still easily the best DB through 3 weeks.

  • R Ya-Sin CB - Great grading last week to bring his year grade to 73.2. Hope it continues. Best DB easily on the team.
    • 100% / 98% / 49% / 
    • 63.7 / 62.5 / 73.2
  • K Moore CB - Better game over last week, still need more.
    • 96% / 97% / 99% / 
    • 56.1 / 42.9 / 48.7 /
  • T Carrie CB - 
    • 69% / 69% / 
    • 60.6 / 58.8 / NA / 
  • I Rodgers CB - trending back up. 
    • 11% / 31% / 22% / 
    • 46.7 / 33.9 / 43.2 /
  • Rhodes - ouch. Guessing still not 100%
    • NA / NA / 91% / 
    • NA / NA / 41.2
       

Safety Note - Sendejo has a nice first day. More please.

  • K Willis SS - Didn't get torched like in weeks prior, but still grading very low.
    • 100% / 100% / 68% / 
    • 40.6 / 47.0 / 41.1
  • J Blackmon FS - Not bad
    • 100% / 100% / 97% / 
    • 53.4 / 64.6 / 64.4 / 
  • A Sendejo - Great 1st game coming in to relieve Willis
    • NA / NA / 32% / 
    • NA / NA / 69.3 / 
  • G Odum
    • NA / NA / 3% / 
    • NA / NA / 60.0 / 
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks.  Agree with nearly all of the commentary.

 

We'll see if the Woods for Stallworth and Sandejo for Willis moves stick.  This might be the beginning of the end for Willis.

 

Will we sign somebody to compete with Oke?  Doubtful.

 

Hines is an enigma.  He's not really that good of a RB, but he's not a slot receiver either.  If you line him up in the backfield with JT its going to take him a few steps to cross the LOS and into space, unless you just give him swing passes or laterals.  

 

How many here want to see him take more handoffs?  Raise your hand.

 

I think JTs usage needs to go up and Hines down simply because Hines talent is limited.  He's good at what he does, but he really only does one thing well, IMO, which is catching the short pass in space.  Lining him up in the BF with JT is going to remove one TE, and that hurts OL blocking.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically, there are way too many below average players on this ball club.

 

Now, in almost any team sport, when you have a situation where most of the players are grading so poorly CONSISTENTLY, it's either a bad scheme, bad coaching, or bad players. We need to figure out what the 2021 issue is. Is it the players? Well, what were the average grades of those guys in 2020? Are they performing worse? If they are, what's the context? Are they injured? Unmotivated? Did they get paid and drop off in motivation? Are they outmatched?

 

Is it coaching? What're the key schematic differences from last year? 

 

Sidenote, I thought Sendejo flashed on Sunday. It took me a while to realize who #42 was but he was always around the football. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really hope Rock has turned it around. The Buckner stat is really eye opening though. Need way more from Leonard considering what was paid. Looks lost in coverage at times, same with Willis. Creeps in too low and gets torched when he can’t make the up ground. Needs to keep the play in front of him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Will try to keep this going every week with updates so we can follow along performance peaks and valleys
As always, if you don't like PFF... just don't click.. 

 

Keeping it simple
Rounding up
Under 50 - Red
Over 70 -  Blue


PFF grades are year to date
Snap count % are per game

 

Format 
Player - comments 
Snap count %
PFF grades (year to date, not per game)
 

 

 

QB Note - While not great, not bad at all given pressure/hits ranking

  • C Wentz QB - Still grading decent despite our OL woes.
    • 100% / 93% / 100% / 
    • 60.1 / 67.8 / 68.5 / 
  • J Eason QB - 
    • NA / 7% / NA / 
    • NA / 29.6 / NA / 
       

RB Note - I just don't get the usage %s

  • J Taylor RB - Better grade, still low usage. Less than Hines this game??
    • 55% / 45% / 48% / 
    • 60.3 / 60.5 / 64.1 / 
  • N Hines RB - Still grading solid, up from last game.
    • 45% / 37% / 56% / 
    • 69.6 / 60.9 / 67.9 / 
  • M Mack RB 
    • NA / 19% / NA / 
    • NA / 53.8 / NA / 
       

TE Note - I think the blocking needs (due to OL woes) is hurting this group

  • J Doyle TE
    • 59% / 70% / 57% / 
    • 64.7 / 71.2 / 68.1 / 
  • M Alie-Cox TE
    • 51% / 40% / 46% / 
    • 50.0 / 51.2 / 56.1 / 
  • K Granson TE
    • 9%  / 9% / 20% / 
    • NA / NA / NA / 
       

WR Note 

  • M Pittman WR - grades still trending up
    • 97% / 90% / 93% / 
    • 60.8 / 68.8 / 72.7
  • Z Pascal WR - down game for Zach. Leads the team in drops
    • 91% / 91% / 89% / 
    • 64.9 / 62.0 / 57.7
  • P Campbell WR - not the best game
    • 61% / NA / 80% / 
    • 62.6 / NA / 56.9 / 
  • M Strachan WR
    • 24% / 51% / NA / 
    • 75.2 / 62.3 / NA / 
  • A Dulin WR
    • 8% / 39% / 11% / 
    • NA / 59.5 / 58.6 / 
  • D Harris WR
    • NA / 3% / NA / 
    • NA / NA / NA / 
       

OL Note - Feel like 2020 Philly OL 

  • E Fisher LT - Played 100% this week, gave up 2 more sacks. Too fast?
    • NA / 73% / 100% / 
    • NA / 62.0 (1 Sack) / 54.1 (3 total sacks, not 3 in the game) / 
  • B Smith RT - need him back
    • 100% / NA / NA / 
    • 60.8 (1) / NA / NA / 
  • J Davenport T - bit better, still bad
    • 100% / 100% / 72% / 
    • 59.8 (2) / 43.0 (2) / 47.4 (2) / 
  • M Glowinski G - Guessing Smith's absence is impacting him big time
    • 100% / 100% / 100% / 
    • 50.7 / 45.3 / 43.4 (1) / 
  • Q Nelson G - Was trending better before injury
    • 100% / 100% / 21% / 
    • 72.7 / 63.9 / 69.3 / 
  • R Kelly C - still good, not great
    • 100% / 100% / 100% / 
    • 67.9 / 68.8 (1) / 68.2 (1)
  • M Pryor OT - would like to see his snap count increase, and less JD.
    • NA / 27% / 28% / 
    • NA / 62.3 / 66.5 / 
  • C Reed OG - Nice job stepping in for Q
    • NA / NA / 79% / 
    • NA / NA / 68.6 / 

 

 

iDL Note -  

  • D Buckner DT - doesn't seem to be himself this year so far.
    • 87% / 88% / 76% / 
    • 59.6 / 71.3 / 66.9 (1 total sack)
  • G Stewart NT - snap counts are decreasing, which I think is good. 75+ is too much for a NT
    • 81% / 75% / 69% / 
    • 62.9 / 66.9 / 65.8 / 
  • T Stallworth DT - 
    • 13% / 27% / NA / 
    • 44.2 / 39.4 / NA / 
  • C Williams - Not great, but not bad. 
    • NA / NA / 18% / 
    • NA / NA / 55.5 / 
  • A Woods - Like Williams, not great, but not Stallworth level bad.
    • NA / NA / 18% / 
    • NA / NA / 54.3 / 

 

DE Note - 

  • K Paye DE - still grading strong though limited snaps
    • 76% / 69% / 10% / 
    • 77.7 / 75.1 / 74.2
  • A Muhammad DE - Still very solid and consistent.
    • 70% / 61% / 78% / 
    • 68.0 (1)  / 67.7 (2) / 66.7 (2)
  • T Lewis DE - Huge grading uptick at the same time as his snaps go up. Need more Lewis.
    • 54% / 54% / 78% / 
    • 66.7 / 69.7 / 79.5
  • B Banogu DE - not a bad day
    • 11% / 7% / 19% / 
    • 54.1 / 59.5 / 60.2 / 
  • K Turay DE - Little better with the increased snap count. 
    • NA / 19% / 34% / 
    • NA / 44.4 / 49.5 / 
       

LB Note - 

  • B Okereke LB - need improvement. Grades still descending. Leads team in missed Ts
    • 100% / 100% / 100% / 
    • 58.3 / 57.4 / 53.1 / 
  • D Leonard LB - back to 70s, still need more given his pay
    • 100% / 100% / 100% / 
    • 71.3 / 69.5 / 70.1
  • Z Franklin LB
    • 24% / 5% / 31% / 
    • 52.9 / 58.9 / 50.3 / 
  • EJ Speed - decent day back from injury
    • NA / NA / 9% / 
    • NA / NA / 64.6 / 
       

CB Note - Rock still easily the best DB through 3 weeks.

  • R Ya-Sin CB - Great grading last week to bring his year grade to 73.2. Hope it continues. Best DB easily on the team.
    • 100% / 98% / 49% / 
    • 63.7 / 62.5 / 73.2
  • K Moore CB - Better game over last week, still need more.
    • 96% / 97% / 99% / 
    • 56.1 / 42.9 / 48.7 /
  • T Carrie CB - 
    • 69% / 69% / 
    • 60.6 / 58.8 / NA / 
  • I Rodgers CB - trending back up. 
    • 11% / 31% / 22% / 
    • 46.7 / 33.9 / 43.2 /
  • Rhodes - ouch. Guessing still not 100%
    • NA / NA / 91% / 
    • NA / NA / 41.2
       

Safety Note - Sendejo has a nice first day. More please.

  • K Willis SS - Didn't get torched like in weeks prior, but still grading very low.
    • 100% / 100% / 68% / 
    • 40.6 / 47.0 / 41.1
  • J Blackmon FS - Not bad
    • 100% / 100% / 97% / 
    • 53.4 / 64.6 / 64.4 / 
  • A Sendejo - Great 1st game coming in to relieve Willis
    • NA / NA / 32% / 
    • NA / NA / 69.3 / 
  • G Odum
    • NA / NA / 3% / 
    • NA / NA / 60.0 / 

East, do they have pass protection grades for RBs on PFF?  And if so, do you have access to it?  And if you have access to it, can you post the grades?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

Thanks.  Agree with nearly all of the commentary.

 

We'll see if the Woods for Stallworth and Sandejo for Willis moves stick.  This might be the beginning of the end for Willis.

Don't think Willis needs to be kicked to the curb, just limited to box safety play. He's good there. If you're going to play other schemes that require a SS to cover verts, Willis isn't the guy. Not saying Sendejo is the guy (down year last year), but likely better coverage option. I still say Blackmon could be a pro bowl type SS if allowed to play the position. We just don't have options at FS.

 

Just purely on Sendejo... He graded 70s in 17, 18, and 19, so we really shouldn't be shocked to see him do well. 

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

 

Will we sign somebody to compete with Oke?  Doubtful.

Doubt we go out and sign anyone at this point. Speed is probably the best bet to compete with him, but we have no clue about his ceiling/floor to be honest. Fair to say at this point Oke simply struggles vs the run. I personally think he'd tackle better from WILL than MIKE. Less traffic. 

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

 

Hines is an enigma.  He's not really that good of a RB, but he's not a slot receiver either.  If you line him up in the backfield its going to take him a few steps to cross the LOS and into space, unless you just give him swing passes or laterals.  

 

How many here want to see him take more handoffs, raise your hand?

 

I think JTs usage needs to go up and Hines down simply because Hines talent is limited.  He's good at what he does, but he really only does one thing well, IMO, which is catching the short pass in space.  Lining him up in the BF is going to remove one TE, and that hurts OL blocking.

 

This all goes back to Reich's comments "our RBs are interchangeable"... And they're just not. HInes is great at what he does well. We just need to use him appropriately. JT should get the RB1 touches, and Hines the APB touches. I love seeing Hines shoot the edge though. Works well typically. Both catch well. We just seem to have no rhythm in the RB space. Not saying Henry type workload for JT, but he needs to be the feature guy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

Basically, there are way too many below average players on this ball club.

 

Now, in almost any team sport, when you have a situation where most of the players are grading so poorly CONSISTENTLY, it's either a bad scheme, bad coaching, or bad players. We need to figure out what the 2021 issue is. Is it the players? Well, what were the average grades of those guys in 2020? Are they performing worse? If they are, what's the context? Are they injured? Unmotivated? Did they get paid and drop off in motivation? Are they outmatched?

 

Is it coaching? What're the key schematic differences from last year? 

 

Sidenote, I thought Sendejo flashed on Sunday. It took me a while to realize who #42 was but he was always around the football. 

 

OL I think is dragging the majority of offensive skill player grades down.

 

The D, just too much reliance on guys developing, and frankly bad fit personnel usage. 

 

Coaching and scheme, absolutely are impacts.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Nickster said:

East, do they have pass protection grades for RBs on PFF?  And if so, do you have access to it?  And if you have access to it, can you post the grades?

 

 

Nope, kind of, and nope. 

Don't have the sub, I can get the numbers from someone who does, but we're not suppose to post stuff from behind the paywall. 

 

I do post some of the pay wall stuff when it's tweeted out by others, or is included in PFF articles that are free. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

JT appears to be pretty bad in pass pro to me, and I think that is probably one thing about his usage.

JT also hasn't been good at being a creative type of back, and is limited going laterally, which also limits play calls.  JT has essentially been benched the last to weeks to some extent in the 2nd halves of the last two games.  2 weeks ago Mack seemed to take his place, and Hines got a lot of PT Sunday.  Whether or not he should get less PT is up for debate I guess.

 

I still think this dude is not all that great.  He's fast, good at trucking DBs when he gets a head of steam, he can catch the dump off and get in space, but doesn't do much else well IMO, or at least he hasn't shown it yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reported elsewhere, so I'll put the post the game specific grades

 

Top 3 on D

CB Rock Ya-Sin: 89.4

DE Tyquan Lewis: 83.4

S Andrew Sendejo: 69.8

 

Top 3 on O

WR Michael Pittman Jr.: 74.9

RB Nyheim Hines: 74.1

RB Jonathan Taylor: 69.5

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Don't think Willis needs to be kicked to the curb, just limited to box safety play. He's good there. If you're going to play other schemes that require a SS to cover verts, Willis isn't the guy. Not saying Sendejo is the guy (down year last year), but likely better coverage option. I still say Blackmon could be a pro bowl type SS if allowed to play the position. We just don't have options at FS.

 

Just purely on Sendejo... He graded 70s in 17, 18, and 19, so we really shouldn't be shocked to see him do well. 

Doubt we go out and sign anyone at this point. Speed is probably the best bet to compete with him, but we have no clue about his ceiling/floor to be honest. Fair to say at this point Oke simply struggles vs the run. I personally think he'd tackle better from WILL than MIKE. Less traffic. 

 

This all goes back to Reich's comments "our RBs are interchangeable"... And they're just not. HInes is great at what he does well. We just need to use him appropriately. JT should get the RB1 touches, and Hines the APB touches. I love seeing Hines shoot the edge though. Works well typically. Both catch well. We just seem to have no rhythm in the RB space. Not saying Henry type workload for JT, but he needs to be the feature guy. 

My thinking on Sandejo is that he is also a box safety who can play coverage better than Willis.  To me, that speaks to being a true C2 safety as opposed to Willis who is strictly and in the box SS.  Sandejo has always played decent but gets penalties from not being able to shut off the aggressiveness.  I wouldn't say that the plan is to replace Willis, but if its a week to week decision based upon who plays better the past week, I can see Willis' PT diminish over time.

 

The RBs are not interchangeable.  But if Hines is in the game the D knows he's getting APB plays, and the opposite when JT is in the game.  Having both in the BF takes away a blocker at the LOS.

 

Dating myself here, but back in the day, that second RB was a Fullback, or at least a RB who could throw a lead block for the other guy.  Walter Payton used to play with Roland Harper, who was a small FB, RB actually, that could throw a block but could also run and catch (multiskilled like a TE).  Fran Tarkenton with the Vikes used to play with a split RB set as standard line up.  Chuck Foreman and Ed Marinaro.  Both were JT types, could run, catch, and big enough to block, so that two back set was dangerous.  If you're going to keep a defense honest when using a two RB set,  one of the RBs has to block at the point of attack on any given play because there is no second TE, and I don't see Hines ever being able to handle that.   Like I said, Hines is an enigma.  Talented guy, just limited usefulness, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Reported elsewhere, so I'll put the post the game specific grades

 

Top 3 on D

CB Rock Ya-Sin: 89.4

DE Tyquan Lewis: 83.4

S Andrew Sendejo: 69.8

 

Top 3 on O

WR Michael Pittman Jr.: 74.9

RB Nyheim Hines: 74.1

RB Jonathan Taylor: 69.5

Our 3rd best defender was a guy off the street who has a record of being a less than above board player..

 

Cool. 

 

Good for Lewis though. Maybe he shows something going forward and we can ease up on Ballard whiffing over and over at DE.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

My thinking on Sandejo is that he is also a box safety who can play coverage better than Willis.  To me, that speaks to being a true C2 safety as opposed to Willis who is strictly and in the box SS.  Sandejo has always played decent but gets penalties from not being able to shut off the aggressiveness.  I wouldn't say that the plan is to replace Willis, but if its a week to week decision based upon who plays better the past week, I can see Willis' PT diminish over time.

 

The RBs are not interchangeable.  But if Hines is in the game the D knows he's getting APB plays, and the opposite when JT is in the game.  Having both in the BF takes away a blocker at the LOS.

 

Dating myself here, but back in the day, that second RB was a Fullback, or at least a RB who could throw a lead block for the other guy.  Walter Payton used to play with Roland Harper, who was a small FB, RB actually, that could throw a block.  Fran Tarkenton with the Vikes used to play with a split RB set as standard line up.  Chuck Foreman and Ed Narinaro.  Both were JT types, could run, catch, and big enough to block, so that two back set was dangerous.  If you're going to keep a defense honest when using a two RB set, I one of the RBs to block at the point of attack on any given play, and I don't see Hines ever being able to handle that.   Like I said, Hines is an enigma.  Talented guy, just limited usefulness, IMO.

I totally understand your overall point, but I'd argue the bolded. I wouldn't say Hines is an enigma, he's just the definition of a gadget player. When you design plays and use gadget guys in the right way, they look like absolute studs. Perfect example is looking at Cordarelle Patterson in ATL right now. When you don't design plays for them, or give them a very specific role, they often look out of place and not good enough.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

My thinking on Sandejo is that he is also a box safety who can play coverage better than Willis.  To me, that speaks to being a true C2 safety as opposed to Willis who is strictly and in the box SS.  Sandejo has always played decent but gets penalties from not being able to shut off the aggressiveness.  I wouldn't say that the plan is to replace Willis, but if its a week to week decision based upon who plays better the past week, I can see Willis' PT diminish over time.

He's not been used all that much the last several years. 

Definitely a SS type. Not sure I'd call him a box guy, but best in the box. 

No clue how he is coverage wise now.

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

The RBs are not interchangeable.  But if Hines is in the game the D knows he's getting APB plays, and the opposite when JT is in the game.  Having both in the BF takes away a blocker at the LOS.

Hines gets too many non-APB touches. 

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

Dating myself here, but back in the day, that second RB was a Fullback, or at least a RB who could throw a lead block for the other guy.  Walter Payton used to play with Roland Harper, who was a small FB, RB actually, that could throw a block but could also run and catch (multiskilled like a TE).  Fran Tarkenton with the Vikes used to play with a split RB set as standard line up.  Chuck Foreman and Ed Marinaro.  Both were JT types, could run, catch, and big enough to block, so that two back set was dangerous.  If you're going to keep a defense honest when using a two RB set,  one of the RBs has to block at the point of attack on any given play because there is no second TE, and I don't see Hines ever being able to handle that.   Like I said, Hines is an enigma.  Talented guy, just limited usefulness, IMO.

We don't use 2 back sets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NorthernColt said:

I totally understand your overall point, but I'd argue the bolded. I wouldn't say Hines is an enigma, he's just the definition of a gadget player. When you design plays and use gadget guys in the right way, they look like absolute studs. Perfect example is looking at Cordarelle Patterson in ATL right now. When you don't design plays for them, or give them a very specific role, they often look out of place and not good enough.

Patterson is looking like a stud in many facets of the game.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

He's not been used all that much the last several years. 

Definitely a SS type. Not sure I'd call him a box guy, but best in the box. 

No clue how he is coverage wise now.

Hines gets too many non-APB touches. 

We don't use 2 back sets. 

I know that we don't use two back sets and likely won't.  I was responding to some comments that suggest we should.  Sorry, should have qualified that, knowing that it wasn't you advocating it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Our 3rd best defender was a guy off the street who has a record of being a less than above board player..

 

Cool. 

 

Good for Lewis though. Maybe he shows something going forward and we can ease up on Ballard whiffing over and over at DE.

 

I don't see Sendejo as being below board, just throw back aggressive.

 

Lewis needs more tweener snaps like Autry was used last year IMO. We've changed our rotation/scheme up this year and it took Paye getting knocked out to see more Lewis. Still not the same type usage as last year though.

 

Hoping they'll tinker a bit and find something that works better.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, NorthernColt said:

Hines can be the guy for us, we just don't use him like that. 

Patterson has about 20 pounds on Hines, probably a 2 inch longer stiff arm, and runs between the tackles much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I know that we don't use two back sets and likely won't.  I was responding to some comments that suggest we should.  Sorry, should have qualified that, knowing that it wasn't you advocating it.

I think we should use 2 back sets at the goal line.  Other teams do if for short yardage.

 

If its 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1, use a bigger body like an extra Oline (like a fullback) to block and let JT run it in.

 

That would be a far better 4th down  play than what we've seen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:

I think we should use 2 back sets at the goal line.  Other teams do if for short yardage.

 

If its 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1, use a bigger body like an extra Oline (like a fullback) to block and let JT run it in.

 

That would be a far better 4th down  play than what we've seen.

Agreed.  BALT has that guy.  A stumpy backup olineman that can occasionally catch a pass in the flat too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goal line and short yardage stuff just needs more variety. At least we saw a call last game for Hines to shoot the edge. 

 

Overall, would just prefer more of a mix or less predictable play calling. And spread it out at times instead of going tight bunch. We don't have the OL right now to bully people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

OL I think is dragging the majority of offensive skill player grades down.

 

The D, just too much reliance on guys developing, and frankly bad fit personnel usage. 

 

Coaching and scheme, absolutely are impacts.

 

I think the line is struggling just a little bit

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

My thinking on Sandejo is that he is also a box safety who can play coverage better than Willis.  To me, that speaks to being a true C2 safety as opposed to Willis who is strictly and in the box SS.  Sandejo has always played decent but gets penalties from not being able to shut off the aggressiveness.  I wouldn't say that the plan is to replace Willis, but if its a week to week decision based upon who plays better the past week, I can see Willis' PT diminish over time.

 

The RBs are not interchangeable.  But if Hines is in the game the D knows he's getting APB plays, and the opposite when JT is in the game.  Having both in the BF takes away a blocker at the LOS.

 

Dating myself here, but back in the day, that second RB was a Fullback, or at least a RB who could throw a lead block for the other guy.  Walter Payton used to play with Roland Harper, who was a small FB, RB actually, that could throw a block but could also run and catch (multiskilled like a TE).  Fran Tarkenton with the Vikes used to play with a split RB set as standard line up.  Chuck Foreman and Ed Marinaro.  Both were JT types, could run, catch, and big enough to block, so that two back set was dangerous.  If you're going to keep a defense honest when using a two RB set,  one of the RBs has to block at the point of attack on any given play because there is no second TE, and I don't see Hines ever being able to handle that.   Like I said, Hines is an enigma.  Talented guy, just limited usefulness, IMO.

I remember Payton with Matt Suhey.  You must be old talking some Roland Harper.  

 

I am surprised no one is trying much 2 back stuff.  Especially our team considering how important Ballard seems to think the RB position is with the draft capital and Hines' pay.  

 

I would think you could create some real match up issues in 2 back sets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don’t understand what PFF is looking at in grading Wentz that close to blue (70) over these first 3 games.  He’s been absolutely atrocious on 3rd & 4th downs.  I’ve seen many of those plays and others where Wentz locks onto his first read (how do we know that should’ve been 1st read?) and then is slow to get to other receivers or looks to scramble. 
 

So on a play like that is PFF saying Wentz was right & his first read should’ve gotten open despite the defense’s coverage?  And that the other receivers that were actually open on the play were irrelevant because Wentz didn’t look for them initially?  He shouldn’t be responsible for reading the defense pre snap and getting the ball to the best option (open receivers) on most plays?  
 

Go back to all 3 games and I assure you that on over half of our 3rd downs where Wentz is either sacked or pressured and barely gets the ball out, there are wide open receivers on most of those plays.  Is it just bad luck that he never sees them?  Is it just bad luck that he overthrows Hines on a wide open drive extending slant or overthrows Pittman for a wide open TD?  Are those critical 3rd & 4th down plays rated the same as every other play or is more value given to them due to the importance of those downs?  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Smoke317 said:

I just don’t understand what PFF is looking at in grading Wentz that close to blue (70) over these first 3 games.  He’s been absolutely atrocious on 3rd & 4th downs.  I’ve seen many of those plays and others where Wentz locks onto his first read (how do we know that should’ve been 1st read?) and then is slow to get to other receivers or looks to scramble. 
 

So on a play like that is PFF saying Wentz was right & his first read should’ve gotten open despite the defense’s coverage?  And that the other receivers that were actually open on the play were irrelevant because Wentz didn’t look for them initially?  He shouldn’t be responsible for reading the defense pre snap and getting the ball to the best option (open receivers) on most plays?  
 

Go back to all 3 games and I assure you that on over half of our 3rd downs where Wentz is either sacked or pressured and barely gets the ball out, there are wide open receivers on most of those plays.  Is it just bad luck that he never sees them?  Is it just bad luck that he overthrows Hines on a wide open drive extending slant or overthrows Pittman for a wide open TD?  Are those critical 3rd & 4th down plays rated the same as every other play or is more value given to them due to the importance of those downs?  

 

Perhaps the bad OL play on 3rd outweighs some things.

Or perhaps the 7 drops (3 from Pascal) occurred on those downs.... 

 

Overall, I think it's just pure silliness to hang too much on Wentz at this point when other things are punch you in the nose atrocious. And I'd love to give him bonus points for playing hurt, but obviously PFF doesn't lol. 

 

I'd also add that our RZ O % is a lot closer to the bottom than our 3rd down %

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Few items from PFF

 

  • Indy now ranked 25th in the NFL.
  • Paye called out in the all-rook guys
    • JOK was the top rated rook. Took 52nd. Would have soooo nice paired with Leonard.
    • Cosmi grading 70+
  • A few items from their game recap
    • Running Back

      Frank Reich’s play-calling approach to the game on Sunday leaves some questions, leaning on the pass when it was clear Wentz was struggling to do much other than check the ball down. Jonathan Taylor tied for the team lead in touches (11), but his yard per carry average (6.4) suggests there were missed opportunities to feed the running back within the flow of a close game.

    • Offensive Line

      The Colts failed again to keep their quarterback clean in the passing game, allowing 17 pressures up front. Eric Fisher was the worst of the unit with seven pressures surrendered in spite of Bud Dupree being unavailable. Mark Glowinski’s struggles weren’t exclusive to last week’s interior pass rush from the Rams, with four pressures allowed (one sack).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Few items from PFF

 

  • Indy now ranked 25th in the NFL.
  • Paye called out in the all-rook guys
    • JOK was the top rated rook. Took 52nd. Would have soooo nice paired with Leonard.
    • Cosmi grading 70+
  • A few items from their game recap
    • Running Back

      Frank Reich’s play-calling approach to the game on Sunday leaves some questions, leaning on the pass when it was clear Wentz was struggling to do much other than check the ball down. Jonathan Taylor tied for the team lead in touches (11), but his yard per carry average (6.4) suggests there were missed opportunities to feed the running back within the flow of a close game.

    • Offensive Line

      The Colts failed again to keep their quarterback clean in the passing game, allowing 17 pressures up front. Eric Fisher was the worst of the unit with seven pressures surrendered in spite of Bud Dupree being unavailable. Mark Glowinski’s struggles weren’t exclusive to last week’s interior pass rush from the Rams, with four pressures allowed (one sack).

 

Here is the thing about JT touches that people that are only into stats don't seem to comprehend.  He was actually featured heavily in the game. 

 

I am throwing out the last drive of the first half because there were seconds on the clock and we were in hurry up, and I am throwing out the last drive of the game because we were down 2+ scores which I think is fair.  

 

So in the first half, we ran 18 plays and 5 of them were JT runs and 3 additional plays were Hines runs.  JT had one 23 yd. run that you could drive a Mack truck thru and he finished it pounding on DBs for a few more yard which is good.  On the other 4 of his runs he gained 11 yds for an average of 2.8 ypc.  Hines averaged 5.7 ypc on his carries and a TD.  So no, you don't throw away the 23 yarder, but anyone who plays NFL RB would have gained most of those 23 yds.  

 

So we ran the ball 8 times out of 18 plays before the whistle when you throw out the final drive with seconds on the clock.  What is to suggest that we should run JT more in the 1st half?  I don't see much evidence that points to that.

 

 

OK.  Now 2nd half. 

 

On the first drive JT ran for 24 yds on 4 carries for a nice 6 ypc average.  He gained 12 yds on two 4th and 1 plays.  Nice work.  We throw on 1st down at the 9 incomplete.  I don't like running from the 9 much and most statistical analyses will show that it is not a good choice to run from  and goal situs from the 9,  but the pass didn't work out, and the 2nd down was incomplete etc.  So we kicked a FG.  So I suppose you could argue that JT should have taken a 1st or 2nd down carry from the 9, but I don't think that argument is overwhelmingly7 convincing.  

 

So next drive JT runs 14 yds for a 1st on 2 carries.  Nice.  Then we throw to PC on 1st down, he doesn't catch it.  Do we always run on 1st?  Do we run on 2nd and 10 there? Drive sputters

 

So up until this point, JT is being used heavily when considering the number of plays we have run.  

 

So on the next drive, Pascal catches a 27 yarder on first. We are incomplete on 1st but then get a defensive holding on 2nd down.  Then on the next first we complete a pass for 36 yds down to the 7.  So I think it's kinda hard to argue that it would have been  run JT  up until this point on this drive since we ran 5 pass plays for 68 yds.  Should we run JT or Hines here on 1st and Goal from the 7,   Maybe.  But we didn't and settled for a FG.  

 

So the last drive we are down 2 scores with 2 minutes left and aren't going to be running.

 


So this is what I keep saying.  With the exception of possibly running from the 7 on that last drive, when do you suggest we run the ball more with JT?  This is why I keep saying that stats without context are vacuous.

 

Now another thing Frank tried to do is run the ball with ends and jets, etc. probably considering the state of the OLINE.

 

JT WAS heavily featured In the 1st half and outside of a 23 yd run that featured nothing remarkable from JT, one could argue that we needed something different in the offense.  Then on the next two drives starting the 2nd half, we did feature JT.  

 

This is why I think one might say like you did , "the 6.4 average suggests we should have ran more", but if you look actually look at the context of the actual game the way it actually played out, then only on a drive that we threw 5 straight times to move 68 yds to the 7 yd line, did we not feature JT and/or HINES running, when you throw out the drives at the ends of each half.

 

So the actual narrative of the actual game doesn't really fit what you seem to be suggesting IMO East.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Shive locked this topic
  • Shive unlocked this topic

Please take any personal spats to PMs instead of clogging up otherwise productive threads. Feel free to disagree and argue the merits of your opinion, but please do not take shots at other posters or act like a troll.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The below seems pretty obvious right?

TN and Miami have equal rushing AVGs allowed thus far... 

 

Might have wanted to use this approach last week when our QB was so hurt he couldn't plant.

 

Not saying 35 rushes is or was needed, but a way better mix than 37 passes by a crippled QB and 18 rushes... 

 

Just to note, that's a 67% pass rate. The highest season pass rate % from 2020 was 66% by Jacksonville.... Colts averaged 56% and 53% the last two years.

 

So with a severely immobile QB, we tossed more than the highest average from all of last year.

 

Smart huh?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may be a mistake to look at individual performance metrics, and be oblivious to integrated performance metrics. Integrated metrics are harder to analyze because each combination is the 'one' realized from a larger number of potential alternatives not chosen.

 

This is the basis for game theory - not the simple game theory they teach in college, but the one's we run on big honkin' computers. In other words, you can't do analytics on Excel spreadsheets.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

It may be a mistake to look at individual performance metrics, and be oblivious to integrated performance metrics. Integrated metrics are harder to analyze because each combination is the 'one' realized from a larger number of potential alternatives not chosen.

 

This is the basis for game theory - not the simple game theory they teach in college, but the one's we run on big honkin' computers. In other words, you can't do analytics on Excel spreadsheets.

When individual metrics match the eye and are similar to integrated (unit), you don't really even need a big honkin' computer or spreadsheet. But the individual metrics we're talking about were subjective eyes (with experience) using objective processes, which are then fed into the machine. 

 

In other words, sometimes bad is bad is bad. 

PFF isn't the end all, but it's better than 99% of the eyes here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

When individual metrics match the eye and are similar to integrated (unit), you don't really even need a big honkin' computer or spreadsheet. But the individual metrics we're talking about were subjective eyes (with experience) using objective processes, which are then fed into the machine. 

 

In other words, sometimes bad is bad is bad. 

PFF isn't the end all, but it's better than 99% of the eyes here. 

The problem with eye tests is that different people see different things. Usually, people see what they want to see. If what you see doesn't align with what you expected to see, what's (or where's) the problem? The worst thing you can do is start making excuses - no talent, too many injuries, bad coaching, <insert your excuse here>. While all those things might be true, maybe there's something else going on? Then we come to the next problem (a biggie), what is it we are going to change? "Let's do SOMETHING, even if it's wrong!" - or "Let's not change anything, it'll get better". Both of those are baaaad, That seems to be where we are right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CoachLite said:

The problem with eye tests is that different people see different things. Usually, people see what they want to see. If what you see doesn't align with what you expected to see, what's (or where's) the problem? The worst thing you can do is start making excuses - no talent, too many injuries, bad coaching, <insert your excuse here>. While all those things might be true, maybe there's something else going on? Then we come to the next problem (a biggie), what is it we are going to change? "Let's do SOMETHING, even if it's wrong!" - or "Let's not change anything, it'll get better". Both of those are baaaad, That seems to be where we are right now.

 

I find it a waste of time trying to foolosophize about fan board (or fan in general) behavior. I've been on this earth long enough to understand and accept it is what it is. The what's wrong (or excuses), what's the fix, who's to blame, etc. is natural human behavior. 

 

Eye test are always suspect. But I place eye tests done by trained individuals (like at PFF) that do it all day everyday in higher regard than fans and media. But watching guys get burnt for example over and over, doesn't really require a lot of training to form a basic opinion. 

 

And most important, at the end of the day, it's a game. Just entertainment. 

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...