Fisher?

[TimetobringDfence!]

Should we be worried or does Eric get a pass for his poor pass blocking so far. I would say he was a contributing factor to our loss, giving up the strip sack in the redzone.

[Mr.Debonair]

Just speaking on that play, I thought the guy was offside. It was either that or his get off was perfectly timed up for the snap and Fisher was late getting out of stance

[Shive]

7 minutes ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

Should we be worried or does Eric get a pass for his poor pass blocking so far. I would say he was a contributing factor to our loss, giving up the strip sack in the redzone.

He looked shaky at first, but seemed to settle in as the game went on. I think Oweh timing snaps was getting him frustrated. I said before the game that I was worried about him and his speed and he definitely had Fisher frazzled.

[throwing BBZ]

6 minutes ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

Should we be worried or does Eric get a pass for his poor pass blocking so far. I would say he was a contributing factor to our loss, giving up the strip sack in the redzone.

 

 Guessing you watched the sack on the radio.
 It was either an off sides or a perfectly timed rush. Either way, few LT's would have stopped it. And it is up to the QB to protect the ball.
 We lost for a number of reasons, but mostly because of Failed kicks.
 One extra point away from a great victory.  
  Today is the day to listen to the "lamentation of the women" as Conan said.

[TimetobringDfence!]

Just now, Shive said:

He looked shaky at first, but seemed to settle in as the game went on. I think Oweh timing snaps was getting him frustrated. I said before the game that I was worried about him and his speed and he definitely had Fisher frazzled.

Serious question if we are in position to win the division and Fisher isn't doing it, when do we tell Big Q man up buddy need you at LT...

[Indyfan4life]

1 minute ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Guessing you watched the sack on the radio.
 It was either an off sides or a perfectly timed rush. Either way, few LT's would have stopped it. And it is up to the QB to protect the ball.
 We lost for a number of reasons, but mostly because of Failed kicks.
 One extra point away from a great victory.  
  Today is the day to listen to the "lamentation of the women" as Conan said.

Very offsides. 

[TimetobringDfence!]

1 minute ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Guessing you watched the sack on the radio.
 It was either an off sides or a perfectly timed rush. Either way, few LT's would have stopped it. And it is up to the QB to protect the ball.
 We lost for a number of reasons, but mostly because of Failed kicks.
 One extra point away from a great victory.  
  Today is the day to listen to the "lamentation of the women" as Conan said.

I can get on board with the timed blitz... but he still has been shaky but time will tell.

[Shive]

12 minutes ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

Serious question if we are in position to win the division and Fisher isn't doing it, when do we tell Big Q man up buddy need you at LT...

I think people need to just drop this notion that we'll put Q at LT. They've already said they aren't going to do that, so to answer your question, I think that we never tell Q that.

[BlackTiger]

4 minutes ago, Shive said:

I think people need to just drop this notion that we'll put Q at LT.

I think paying him to stay at guard will be a mistake.  we could be fine with Reed there 

[GoColts8818]

I thought Fisher struggled on a couple of plays early but then settled down and played a very nice game overall.  He’s far better than Davenport but I am not sure he’s the long term answer at LT either.

[cdgacoltsfan]

3 hours ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

Serious question if we are in position to win the division and Fisher isn't doing it, when do we tell Big Q man up buddy need you at LT...

Serious answer. Not happening.

[John Waylon]

Robert Mathis says Oweh got a good jump on the snap. I’ll trust his expertise on the matter and excuse Fisher on that play. I mean it’s not like it’s the first time we’ve seen defenses figuring out our snap count and getting great jumps on the ball this season. That’s been probably my main gripe with Wentz, as he gets settled into a game the defense absolutely picks up on the snap count, which is just making it harder to pass block right out of the gate.
 

Whatever we’re doing for a snap count doesn’t seem to be working as well as we’re expecting it to. 

[Zoltan]

After looking at the play again on the strip sack, it wasn't all Fisher's fault, part of it is on Wentz having a predictable snap count and the defender played it perfectly (if not crossing a tad to early). Overall Fisher is gonna slowly get better throughout the season as he gets into football shape.

[Ratking]

Fisher is another Ballard mistake. Luckily its a short contract. If Fisher ever regains his form post injury chances are it will be with another team. Or who knows, maybe Ballard will throw money at him like he will with Nelson, and we can have the most high priced least impactful oline in the NFL. 

[richard pallo]

We should not be worried.  Once he gets back to shape and knows our system he will be fine. No worries.  Our LT for many years to come.  He will get his 2nd SB ring with us. 

[jchandler7]

Fisher is NOT the reason we lost that game. He has had a few bad plays but overall hes played very well after his 1st game back. 

[coltsblue1844]

4 hours ago, BlackTiger said:

I think paying him to stay at guard will be a mistake.  we could be fine with Reed there 

Q is one of my favorite players on the team... but as much as i hate saying it, we would be better off with players that make a bigger impact on the game, for the $$ that we would be paying him, at the end of his current contract...   

 

Having a good line is important...but we dont have to have the most expensive line in the NFL, to be successful... what we DO need, is better DE play, better CB play and a real play making WR and/or TE.

 

We have a great QB (in my honest opinion), a great young RB (Taylor), a great DT (Buckner)...  we have no great pass rushers, no great WRs or TEs...and definitely need help in the secondary (although pass rush would help them, also... hard to be good in coverage with no pass rush 

[BlackTiger]

2 hours ago, coltsblue1844 said:

Q is one of my favorite players on the team... but as much as i hate saying it, we would be better off with players that make a bigger impact on the game, for the $$ that we would be paying him, at the end of his current contract...   

 

Having a good line is important...but we dont have to have the most expensive line in the NFL, to be successful... what we DO need, is better DE play, better CB play and a real play making WR and/or TE.

 

We have a great QB (in my honest opinion), a great young RB (Taylor), a great DT (Buckner)...  we have no great pass rushers, no great WRs or TEs...and definitely need help in the secondary (although pass rush would help them, also... hard to be good in coverage with no pass rush 

Agreed, paying an elite guard is a weird problem to have.  Nobody wants him to hit the market and we really dont know if hes a capable Lt without trying him there.

 

I think they should at least try him there and see what happens before they hand out the biggest contract ever to a guard.

[TimetobringDfence!]

5 hours ago, coltsblue1844 said:

Q is one of my favorite players on the team... but as much as i hate saying it, we would be better off with players that make a bigger impact on the game, for the $$ that we would be paying him, at the end of his current contract...   

 

Having a good line is important...but we dont have to have the most expensive line in the NFL, to be successful... what we DO need, is better DE play, better CB play and a real play making WR and/or TE.

 

We have a great QB (in my honest opinion), a great young RB (Taylor), a great DT (Buckner)...  we have no great pass rushers, no great WRs or TEs...and definitely need help in the secondary (although pass rush would help them, also... hard to be good in coverage with no pass rush 

I'd take Reed at a qtr of Q price tag any day. We have to many holes to pay a Gaurd like that. If Q steps put and plays Tackle just as good then pay him.

[EastStreet]

6 hours ago, jchandler7 said:

Fisher is NOT the reason we lost that game. He has had a few bad plays but overall hes played very well after his 1st game back. 

Fisher has been bad. 4 sacks in 4 games, plus 3 penalties, and one of the lowest run blocking grades. 

He's getting ole'd by DEs.

 

 

[Indyfan4life]

Oh no. A guy that most people said wouldn’t be playing until mid-end October at the earliest after a torn achilles but came back earlier than we thought isn’t playing his absolute best football but is getting better? I can’t believe anyone here would be upset. 
 

I am shocked! Shocked! Well, not that shocked. 

[Ratking]

1 hour ago, Indyfan4life said:

Oh no. A guy that most people said wouldn’t be playing until mid-end October at the earliest after a torn achilles but came back earlier than we thought isn’t playing his absolute best football but is getting better? I can’t believe anyone here would be upset. 
 

I am shocked! Shocked! Well, not that shocked. 

I remember Pacer fans saying the same thing about Vic after his injury.... He still hasn't regained his form to this day. 

[Indyfan4life]

3 minutes ago, Ratking said:

I remember Pacer fans saying the same thing about Vic after his injury.... He still hasn't regained his form to this day. 

Sarcasm wouldn’t be lost on you, would it?

[Ratking]

20 hours ago, BlackTiger said:

I think paying him to stay at guard will be a mistake.  we could be fine with Reed there 

It would be a huge mistake. I wish a smart guy like @EastStreetwould post injury chances of offensive lineman vs other positions. I wonder if having a couple decent guys like Reed is better than one high priced like Nelson. That way you have backups for the inevitable injuries. 

[Ratking]

5 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

Sarcasm wouldn’t be lost on you, would it?

Lol I am confused now. I thought you were sarcastically saying you believed Fisher would get better as the season goes on. I hope your right. 

[Indyfan4life]

27 minutes ago, Ratking said:

Lol I am confused now. I thought you were sarcastically saying you believed Fisher would get better as the season goes on. I hope your right. 

My response was sarcastic in tone. People were adamant he wouldn’t be playing until the end of the month. So when he came back early, obviously he wasn’t 100%, but a lot of complaints have been about him not playing at an all-pro level. Each week he has gotten a little bit better and will continue to. 

[TimetobringDfence!]

11 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Fisher has been bad. 4 sacks in 4 games, plus 3 penalties, and one of the lowest run blocking grades. 

He's getting ole'd by DEs.

 

 

Let Pryor have a go on the left...

[TimetobringDfence!]

44 minutes ago, Ratking said:

It would be a huge mistake. I wish a smart guy like @EastStreetwould post injury chances of offensive lineman vs other positions. I wonder if having a couple decent guys like Reed is better than one high priced like Nelson. That way you have backups for the inevitable injuries. 

It most certainly would be, I think with the chronic minor back flare ups Ballard would be wise to consider cheaper options and add more depth. Now if Nelson for some reason has to play LT and does it lights out and will make the move out it's a different story...

[Colt.45]

Fisher was always going to need a long-is ramp to get into his groove. I don't expect him to be great for another few weeks.

[Dingus McGirt]

Maybe I missed them, but, I didn't pick up any hard counts by Wentz.  Manning or Luck would have eaten them alive with that technique.

[holeymoley99]

I thought no way he would be back this soon, Dayo was hurt same exact day and isnt even practicing. If Tevi wasnt as awful as most feared before his injury, Holden showed anything (Which he didnt) and Davenport played even below average we could have waiting on Fisher a bit longer BUT none of that happened and we needed him back asap. Now could Pryor slide over when Smith comes back and Fisher still isnt finding his grove ? Yes BUT Fisher at LT and Pryor at RT is better then Pryor at LT and Davenport at RT so until Braden is back not a realistic option. 

[Pelt]

Fisher is playing what would still be the equivalent of his preseason, after an achilles, on a new team, new scheme, etc...

 

Holy ****balls, folks, give him a little time here.

[lollygagger8]

Oh how everyone forgets Davenport @ LT

[NannyMcafee]

21 hours ago, Ratking said:

Fisher is another Ballard mistake. Luckily its a short contract. If Fisher ever regains his form post injury chances are it will be with another team. Or who knows, maybe Ballard will throw money at him like he will with Nelson, and we can have the most high priced least impactful oline in the NFL. 

 

I have yet to see you say one good thing about the Colts. Never mind the fact that almost the entire line has been injured since training camp. 

 

If we trade away Nelson good luck seeing this line be any good for the next several years. 

[Introspect]

On 10/12/2021 at 11:30 AM, TimetobringDfence! said:

Serious question if we are in position to win the division and Fisher isn't doing it, when do we tell Big Q man up buddy need you at LT...

NO CHANCE WE WILL BE IN A POSITION TO WIN THIS DIVISION....

[TimetobringDfence!]

1 hour ago, Introspect said:

NO CHANCE WE WILL BE IN A POSITION TO WIN THIS DIVISION....

Titans aren't that much better... same issues as us...going into their toughest stretch.

[Introspect]

4 minutes ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

Titans aren't that much better... same issues as us...going into their toughest stretch.

True but with both teams being equal... Our play calling (Frank) is horrible. That will seal our fate

[holeymoley99]

2 hours ago, Introspect said:

True but with both teams being equal... Our play calling (Frank) is horrible. That will seal our fate

Teams arent equal though, we have much more talent overall. They got 2 injuries and lost to the Jets, we have had non stop injuries and nearly beat Rams and Ravens two legit super bowl contenders.

[EastStreet]

10 hours ago, Ratking said:

It would be a huge mistake. I wish a smart guy like @EastStreetwould post injury chances of offensive lineman vs other positions. I wonder if having a couple decent guys like Reed is better than one high priced like Nelson. That way you have backups for the inevitable injuries. 

 

Here ya go. I've posted this, plus a few other decent links/reads on injury by position (and other things).

This link has a couple parts, but I've pasted the positional component below.

https://www.hogshaven.com/2019/6/22/18658887/understanding-injuries-in-the-nfl-part-3

 

the TLDR

OL is well below average in terms of injury rate by position. Only QB is lower. And size matters, to a point (which they make an interesting observation farther below).

 

Injury Rate By Position

Position  Injury Rate per 1000 AEs (Standard Error)

RB  20.7 (0.5)

DB  17.4 (0.3)

WR  17.1 (0.4)

LB  17.1 (0.3)

TE  16.9 (0.5)

DL  15.1 (0.3)

OL  12.8 (0.3)

QB  8.6 (0.4)

ST  4.4 (0.3)

Total  15.1 (0.1)

 

Clearly, if we just looked at injury rate vs weight, it would appear that smaller players are more likely to be injured, but that is only because the most injured position groups happen to have smaller, more mobile players. Having established this baseline, we can then plot the injury rate vs weight for each of these position groups.

For the most part, it actually looks like smaller players are less likely to be injured, not more likely. However, each graph has a slightly different pattern that is worth describing.

 

• DB is perhaps the easiest plot to interpret, and shows a clear increasing risk of injury based on size.
• DL shows a similar pattern, but the effect is not as large and it is overall a much flatter plot, indicating size is not strongly correlated to injury for DL. The up-down-up shape of the curve may be due to conflation of DEs and DTs.
• LB actually shows a slightly decreased risk of injury for larger LBs up until the heaviest weight category, which has significantly increased risk.
• OL shows a clearly increasing risk of injury based on size, except for the highest weight category, which has greatly decreased risk of injury (this may be the threshold at which OL can simply win with size).
• QB also shows a clearly increasing injury rate based on size.
• RB shows an increasing injury rate based on size up to a point, then a decreasing injury rate. This pattern may again be because two slightly different position groups (HBs and FBs) are being lumped in the same category together.
• TE also shows an increasing injury rate up to a point, then a decrease. It may be due to larger TEs being used primarily as blockers rather than pass catchers.
• WR shows a strong correlation between increased size and increased rate of injury, although the very smallest weight category of WR also had an increased rate of injury.

 

Overall, these data seem to indicate that smaller players are actually a bit less prone to injury within a given position group, although usage seems to play a much bigger role than size in determining injury rate. My big takeaway from this is not that teams should target smaller or larger players, but rather just that teams should not assume that smaller players are more prone to injury, as injury history is a much better predictor of future injury than size. Players like Russell Wilson and Christian McCaffrey are perfect examples of undersized players who were healthy in college and managed to stay healthy in the NFL despite being undersized.

[coltsfan_canada]

On 10/12/2021 at 11:30 AM, TimetobringDfence! said:

Serious question if we are in position to win the division and Fisher isn't doing it, when do we tell Big Q man up buddy need you at LT...