Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Fisher?


TimetobringDfence!
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, TimetobringDfence! said:

Let Pryor have a go on the left...

IDK. It's just a mess and not sure what the answer is. 

If Fisher continues to struggle, and Reed continues to play average to above average, I'd play Q at LT if he comes back healthy. 

In the mean time, I don't really want Davenport starting at all anywhere, so not sure I'd move Pryor right now. If Braden is back soon, I might try him out at LT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2021 at 3:21 PM, John Waylon said:

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. 

Then once again I blame Reich for not telling Wentz to give a hard count every now and again. That’s a great way to stop timed rushes

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours 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. 

He came off an Achilles injury and not a spring chicken. You have to expect a few bad plays from time to time. Unfortunately Reich was clueless and never made an adjustment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

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.

As Wentz settles in Hopefully he develops a better presnap game it will help out a lot...

3 hours ago, indyagent17 said:

He came off an Achilles injury and not a spring chicken. You have to expect a few bad plays from time to time. Unfortunately Reich was clueless and never made an adjustment.

A few bad plays shouldn't be letting Wentz get blindsided twice a game...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, indyagent17 said:

Then once again I blame Reich for not telling Wentz to give a hard count every now and again. That’s a great way to stop timed rushes

A lot of times, the play call was coming in too late. Commentators even mentioned it. 

But overall, yes, should have been part of the game plan. It's not like Oweh (and others) haven't been playing like that prior.

 

3 hours ago, indyagent17 said:

He came off an Achilles injury and not a spring chicken. You have to expect a few bad plays from time to time. Unfortunately Reich was clueless and never made an adjustment.

I feel bad for Fisher, a bit. He was likely rushed back into action too early. But that's on Ballard for rolling the dice on a guy we knew was going to be late to the party, and rusty when he did join. But like you say, he's older, and like many said when we signed him, perhaps not as fast in the healing department these days, and simply a risk to return to form in the first place. But beyond that, it's Reich's job to adjust, and he really hasn't. And Fisher has just been bad (not just a few plays).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

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.

Injury_Rate_vs_Weight_by_Position.png

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.

This is epic. Very much appreciate you taking the time and energy to post it.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ratking said:

This is epic. Very much appreciate you taking the time and energy to post it.  

You're very welcome.

 

Here's another one if interested. It's a bit older 2010-2014 data

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2015/nfl-injuries-part-iv-variation-position

 

There's one other that's pretty good that dives into injury type, but can't find it lol.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2021 at 4:30 PM, 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 

 

 Preach !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol....from "he won't play this season...to he'll play later in the season....to, he might play early in the season, to.....we know he's toast less than 10 months after Achilles heel surgery. 

 

Fans seem to always have a cocked and loaded gloom and doom revolver at hand for any occasion. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

Lol....from "he won't play this season...to he'll play later in the season....to, he might play early in the season, to.....we know he's toast less than 10 months after Achilles heel surgery. 

 

Fans seem to always have a cocked and loaded gloom and doom revolver at hand for any occasion. 

Yeah the word someone else used was serviceable.  That’s how he’s played.  I am interested to see if he gets better the more healthy he gets and when Nelson gets back. It’s not like he’s been Davenport bad since he’s been out there.  For the most part he’s solid but you know he’s going to lose about five plays a game.  

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

15 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Yeah the word someone else used was serviceable.  That’s how he’s played.  I am interested to see if he gets better the more healthy he gets and when Nelson gets back. It’s not like he’s been Davenport bad since he’s been out there.  For the most part he’s solid but you know he’s going to lose about five plays a game.  

Wentz about had both of his legs broke. Hope he doesn't have any more of those plays left in him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s got to be better. End of story. We have to decide whether we are going to pay him to stick around in a couple short months from now and as we sit here today the answer to that should honestly be a no. He’s not been Davenport bad, but is this the guy we want for the foreseeable future at the left tackle spot?


Office Kantoor GIF by RauwCC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Looking at this list I’m glad we have Eric.  We just need to be patient with his recovery.  I think Ballard signed him knowing we would have to be.

I think he will be resigned for 2022. Makes sense with no 1st in 2022. 

  • Like 1
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...