Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

At what point does it become stubbornness?


bluephantom87
 Share

Recommended Posts

Most of the national media has elevated Lamar to the mvp level after Monday night's performance against the Colts BUT they also blamed the loss on the Colts for getting WAAY too conservative on BOTH sides of the ball trying to PROTECT the lead against a team that amped up its play and exploited the Colt's tendency under Frank to play it safe while leading.

 

I feel that Frank as hc lacks a sense of urgency in his OVERALL approach. It's been beat to death about Frank's playcalling abilities as far as being predictable,  unimaginative in stretches, conservative to a fault at times and that his offense doesn't necessarily cater to the strengths of his skill players to create mismatches. (See Hines) 

 

Frank stated after the Raven loss that he got too conservative which is stand up but we've heard it before and at what point does it just become noise like Chuck's "keep chopping wood" phrase if you show no growth or willingness to change by REPEATING the SAME mistakes (pts, 4th downs, game flow) year after year. Does it now qualify as being stubborn at this point? Or is it simply a do what we do type of mentality and stick to the process NO MATTER what the situation is.

 

Once the Ravens went to the no huddle the Colts did ABSOLUTELY nothing to counter on defense. They just sat back in that soft zone as the tired d-line generated no pressure and let Lamar torch the defense with wide open at times Brown and Andrews. True the secondary was decimated but as the commentators said during the game you have to TRY something different because you're giving up big plays, chunk yards and allowing the Ravens to score at will ANYWAY. Mix it up and go man. Force Lamar to throw into some tight spots and bring some heat with some timely delayed blitzes. The point is DO or TRY something DIFFERENT!!

 

Does Frank even communicate with Flus during the game? As hc that discussion should've been had especially in the 4th quarter about changing up some in an attempt to slow the Ravens down. It also might be a hard sell for Frank because he himself has a tendency to stay the course and that is ONE of the problems plaguing this team.

  • Like 6
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bottom line is if this defense can be fixed it won’t put so much pressure on the offense. Yes we needed one more TD but with that lead they should of been fine. The crap storm of a injured kicker and secondary just came together at the wrong time. So Reich should of got a little more aggressive at the end to score a TD.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also wonder on the offensive side of the ball how much leeway does Carson have on audibles? I've noticed a couple of times that commentators have stated Carson should've changed the play and it seems to be on run plays up the middle against stacked boxes that had no chance from jump. Usually resulting in the play being blown up and a loss of yards.

 

I think he has the green light but is hesitant being new to the team and by trying to reestablish that relationship with Frank. As the season progresses I think he will more and more especially after he builds that bond with the offensive skill players.

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

3 minutes ago, bluephantom87 said:

I also wonder on the offensive side of the ball how much leeway does Carson have on audibles? I've noticed a couple of times that commentators have stated Carson should've changed the play and it seems to be on run plays up the middle against stacked boxes that had no chance from jump. Usually resulting in the play being blown up and a loss of yards.

 

I think he has the green light but is hesitant being new to the team and by trying to reestablish that relationship with Frank. As the season progresses I think he will more and more especially after he builds that bond with the offensive skill players.

 

 Spot on. Definitely expect the offense to include more audibles as the unit gets more time together. Playing under the same co-ordinator for several years with many of the same players adds a lot of dimension to an O.
 This is a Learning Season. I'm very excited what i saw from Campbell, Pittman, and Mo-Allie Monday night. Granson had a really good 17 yarder too. The mental game is only going to speed up for these younguns.
 We just gotta get them in the End zone!!! That's when we know we got something!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The defense was conservative because it had third string secondary that got beat deep the one time they went to man coverage. 

 

Completing that thought, the defense is conservative in general because it has no talent, in general.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wentzszn said:

The bottom line is if this defense can be fixed it won’t put so much pressure on the offense. Yes we needed one more TD but with that lead they should of been fine. The crap storm of a injured kicker and secondary just came together at the wrong time. So Reich should of got a little more aggressive at the end to score a TD.

 

The thing that sucks, is we could easily be 3-2, if Wentz doesn't get hurt in the rams game we had enough time to drive for the touchdown or fg to tie it and this game where if we make 1 of our last two fg attempts we would have won. Just always comes down to players getting injured at poor times and bad luck I mean if we win the coin toss I think there was a very good chance we win this game too.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

The thing that sucks, is we could easily be 3-2, if Wentz doesn't get hurt in the rams game we had enough time to drive for the touchdown or fg to tie it and this game where if we make 1 of our last two fg attempts we would have won. Just always comes down to players getting injured at poor times and bad luck I mean if we win the coin toss I think there was a very good chance we win this game too.

The only game we should of lost was the first Seahawks game.  We should be 4-1.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DougDew said:

The defense was conservative because it had third string secondary that got beat deep the one time they went to man coverage. 

 

Completing that thought, the defense is conservative in general because it has no talent, in general.

Then bring the heat if they can’t cover anyway.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JediXMan said:

This coaching staff is very very stubborn. They finally started Pryor week 5. When it was clear to everyone he’s better than Davenport.

Remember the other day the thread I posted about how SF is so similiar right now to the colts. Your comment made me laugh because I just read this tweet.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JediXMan said:

This coaching staff is very very stubborn. They finally started Pryor week 5. When it was clear to everyone he’s better than Davenport.

That was a playbook thing, and they have been playing him as much as they could. That's why in week 4 he played part of the game

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think we should just let the season play out before making any strong declarations about players, coaches, GM, strategies, philosophies,  etc. We’ve only seen just shy of 1/3 of the season. Let’s see what transpires over the next 2/3. It’s not like we’re a laughing stock that gets pummeled every week. We’re competitive, just have to start getting the W, and I think we will. And if not, once we’re eliminated from the playoffs, then let the blame game start. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, DougDew said:

The defense was conservative because it had third string secondary that got beat deep the one time they went to man coverage. 

 

Completing that thought, the defense is conservative in general because it has no talent, in general.

 

Safety was late with the help. Been happening a lot this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with the all the talk about how this defense has no talent. That couldn't be any farther from the truth. No defense will look good if they always stay in a triple vanilla, retreat and surrender scheme. Lamar Jackson is so prone to mistakes it's comical and we didn't even attempt to put any pressure on him or disguise coverages, or confuse him, or even attempt to play an nfl style defense. Just soft zone, deep drops by linebackers, even deeper drops by corners, it was sickening and resulted in a loss in a game we should have EASILY won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Wentzszn said:

The only game we should of lost was the first Seahawks game.  We should be 4-1.


They got 3 TOs (two of which occurred in the RZ) and they still lost by 9 points. Other than TOs, TEN was better across the board. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DougDew said:

The defense was conservative because it had third string secondary that got beat deep the one time they went to man coverage. 

 

Completing that thought, the defense is conservative in general because it has no talent, in general.

The defense is pretty much always conservative. Our brand of football is QQH on third, and late with the lead. 

Not sure I noticed anything out of the ordinary due to injuries. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The defense was keeping Lamar in check and Brown a non factor for most of the game.  It was a great game plan for 3 quarters. When Rhodes and number 34 left the game, the coverage got worse.

 

The "vanilla" narrative gets old.  Having the DEs drop into coverage is not a vanilla 43.  It didn't work because of the players who were dropping.  The defense ended up rushing 3 and the middle was still wide open.  Poor talent.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, DougDew said:

The defense was keeping Lamar in check and Brown a non factor for most of the game.  It was a great game plan for 3 quarters. When Rhodes and number 34 left the game, the coverage got worse.

 

The "vanilla" narrative gets old.  Having the DEs drop into coverage is not a vanilla 43.  It didn't work because of the players who were dropping.  The defense ended up rushing 3 and the middle was still wide open.  Poor talent.

 

True.  For that game.  Maybe not for Minshew looking like Joe Montana, or even Wilson setting records.

 

I blocked the Brees game out of my mind, but stil...

 

All in all, I get what you're saying.  Lack of talent caused by in game injuries killed us.  But still, how do you let Andrews constantly beat you?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

True.  For that game.  Maybe not for Minshew looking like Joe Montana, or even Wilson setting records.

 

I blocked the Brees game out of my mind, but stil...

 

All in all, I get what you're saying.  Lack of talent caused by in game injuries killed us.  But still, how do you let Andrews constantly beat you?

On the TD, Oke tried but failed.  On the 2 pt,(I think it was that play), Leonard looked like he didn't know what he was doing. 

 

Overall, I would think a dropping DE or an LB would have been keying on Andrews at some point.  

 

I mean, if you are playing back there, wouldn't you be looking at Andrews and watching him?  Sure, if BAL overloaded your zone you're screwed, but at least stop Andrews first. 

 

To me, that failure doesn't seem like a lack of coaching.  It seems like a lack of common sense.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

The defense was keeping Lamar in check and Brown a non factor for most of the game.  It was a great game plan for 3 quarters. When Rhodes and number 34 left the game, the coverage got worse.

 

The "vanilla" narrative gets old.  Having the DEs drop into coverage is not a vanilla 43.  It didn't work because of the players who were dropping.  The defense ended up rushing 3 and the middle was still wide open.  Poor talent.

 

So if you don't have the personnel and are getting GASHED with basically 2 guys who are SCORING AT WILL but you stick with that concept ANYWAY (on top of the soft zone) despite the disastrous results it was yielding, well that sounds a little stubborn to me.

 

The game changed more so when they went no huddle. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bluephantom87 said:

 

So if you don't have the personnel and are getting GASHED with basically 2 guys who are SCORING AT WILL but you stick with that concept ANYWAY (on top of the soft zone) despite the disastrous results it was yielding, well that sounds a little stubborn to me.

 

The game changed more so when they went no huddle. 

Well, you're not going to change to a 34. 

 

And you're not going to play press man in the back 4 when the corners are UDFA rookies. 

 

And we don't have the FS to play Cover 3.

 

Soft zone to run clock is about all you can do, and flood the middle with defenders.  Flus tried to cover the middle, and the LBers, Ss, and DEs who were assigned that responsibility failed. 

 

Its clearly on the limitations of the personnel.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DougDew said:

Well, you're not going to change to a 34. 

 

And you're not going to play press man in the back 4 when the corners are UDFA rookies. 

 

And we don't have the FS to play Cover 3.

 

Soft zone to run clock is about all you can do, and flood the middle with defenders.  Flus tried to cover the middle, and the LBers, Ss, and DEs who were assigned that responsibility failed. 

 

Its clearly on the limitations of the personnel.

We gave up probably close to 300 passing yards per game the last 8 games of 2020. What was the excuse then? I'm guessing the only guys that didn't put up 300 were Tannehill (who rarely does) and whoever was QBing for Jax the last game of the year.

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

On 10/13/2021 at 12:04 PM, DougDew said:

With whom?  Who can blitz besides Leonard?  And I'm not sure that he blitzes very well.

Kenny can blitz effectively if he can anticipate the cadence better, your reference to the lack of talent on the D overall is ludicrous. We have 3 top tier players and D Buck in my opinion is the key to our entire system. He admits his game needs to improve urgently and become a true game wrecker for us. Your contrarian views are comical.
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DougDew said:

Well, you're not going to change to a 34. 

 

And you're not going to play press man in the back 4 when the corners are UDFA rookies. 

 

And we don't have the FS to play Cover 3.

 

Soft zone to run clock is about all you can do, and flood the middle with defenders.  Flus tried to cover the middle, and the LBers, Ss, and DEs who were assigned that responsibility failed. 

 

Its clearly on the limitations of the personnel.

 

You do realize this is NOT the first time that you've.... Sorry I meant to say Flus stayed the course while an opposing qb had a career day carving up that soft zone while having ample time to survey the field from a clean pocket and allow their receivers to roam free usually to the endzone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/13/2021 at 9:04 AM, DougDew said:

With whom?  Who can blitz besides Leonard?  And I'm not sure that he blitzes very well.

Sorry for the delay, I’ve been meaning to respond to this post. 
 

Leonard has 15 career sacks, all in his first three years.   7 his first year, then 5 his second year, then 3 last year.    I believe his 15 sacks is among the leaders for 4-3 LBers.   
 

If he’s not blitzing as much, I suspect it’s in part due to health.   His bad ankle.   His history says he’s a good blitzer. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Wentzszn said:

Leonard isnt quick enough to blitz right now but he is generally really good at it. Maybe we need to blitz Kenny more. He is great at it.

Right now I don’t think we can afford blitzing our corners, so far this year it has consistently failed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/13/2021 at 9:37 AM, DougDew said:

The defense was conservative because it had third string secondary that got beat deep the one time they went to man coverage. 

 

Completing that thought, the defense is conservative in general because it has no talent, in general.

Couldn't agree more. I put way more blame on Ballard for the way this defence is constructed.  I don't think Flus has a lot of confidence in the back end and that jncludes the lbs when it comes to being able to cover.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2021 at 1:14 PM, NewColtsFan said:

Sorry for the delay, I’ve been meaning to respond to this post. 
 

Leonard has 15 career sacks, all in his first three years.   7 his first year, then 5 his second year, then 3 last year.    I believe his 15 sacks is among the leaders for 4-3 LBers.   
 

If he’s not blitzing as much, I suspect it’s in part due to health.   His bad ankle.   His history says he’s a good blitzer. 

Leonard, and the slot corner, (Moore), and the closer to the LOS of the two safeties, (Willis), are the only positions (players) that would frequently blitz in our scheme.  All three players are pretty good at it.

 

The defense is not set up to blitz a lot.

 

And with Moore and Willis on the shelf, I wouldn't expect much blitzing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2021 at 10:16 PM, bluephantom87 said:

 

You do realize this is NOT the first time that you've.... Sorry I meant to say Flus stayed the course while an opposing qb had a career day carving up that soft zone while having ample time to survey the field from a clean pocket and allow their receivers to roam free usually to the endzone.

Flus didn't stay the course.  He dropped DEs into the middle coverage.  The middle was open because the DEs sucked at it.

 

Players sucking at it is synonymous with no talent.  Flus did his job, the players failed to do theirs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Flus didn't stay the course.  He dropped DEs into the middle coverage.  The middle was open because the DEs sucked at it.

 

Players sucking at it is synonymous with no talent.  Flus did his job, the players failed to do theirs.

 

So it's either a Flus problem that he didn't know that his DE's were incapable or were talent void to drop them into coverage but continued to do it anyway or it's a Ballard problem because I notice that you comment on the talent level from time to time.

 

As dc it's Flus's job to put that defense in the BEST position to SUCCEED based on the TALENT LEVEL AT HAND. The endgame is to stop the opposing team from scoring. I'm not going to HELP their cause by being STUBBORN and keep running something that my players physically can't do while the opposing offense steadily exploits the situation by scoring at will. 

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...