Post Week 12 Reich Grievances Thread (MEGA MERGE)

[EastStreet]

17 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Here’s all you need to know….  
 

Ballard loves Frank. 
 

Irsay loves Frank. 
 

They just gave him 4 more years when he had two years left on his contract.   6 years total.  5 after this season.  In an industry that doesn’t offer much job security, Frank has more than most. 
 

Sorry. 

 

Here's something else to know. Nagy was the favorite guy to get the Colts HC job when Pagano was let go.... 

He chose the Bears after their super quick offer that was reportedly more than the Colts offered.

 

Then it was down to McDaniels and Vrabel. They even tried to interview two others, one declined altogether and took the AZ job.

 

Frank wasn't even part of the first round interviews. His phone didn't ring till later when McDaniels backed out and all the first round interviewees already had jobs.

 

Sure they like Frank, and will say so. What else are they going to say. But they liked Nagy more, when first looking for a coach. 

[Colt.45]

8 hours ago, jimmy g said:

Besides, Wentz makes the final call at the line, after seeing the Defense. When they were stacked, he passed. Soon as they switched out, it sounds like he audibled to a run.

 

(I heard the game on the radio. I didn’t see it on tv)

Yup, matches what i saw on TV. It was a matter of who'd blink first or fail to execute.

Folks want to be mad and that's fine but anyone who was here through the manning years knows the drill, the Colts played extremely simple in those years, on defense and offense, they made few mistakes and didnt stack penalties or beat themselves. This team is getting there but not quite there.

[Colt.45]

14 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

Really?  because in the 2nd and 4th quarters, Taylor averaged over 5 ypc.  It was literally only the first quarter where they completely stuffed him.  

I don't mean it literally.  We didnt do the same thing 100 straight times. Neither did they.

In actuality, we ran the ball every time the box count wasn't overwhelmingly against us.

[EastStreet]

9 hours ago, Douzer said:

Yep, the Defense has given up 283 points, and that's bottom 8 in the league. They can't hold a lead or close out a good offense.

 

9 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Exactly, we were up 22-3 at Ravens, 14-0 vs the Titans, and 24-14 yesterday but it is Frank's fault we blew those leads, yeah right  that makes sense 

 

Call me crazy... But I'll just point out that Frank is the head coach.. That means he's Flus's boss, and signs off on D scheme and game plan. So while Flus needs to shoulder a lot of the blame for the D, it also rolls up to Frank. He is the boss. And if you're the boss and one of your employees isn't working out... then you normally do something.

[Jason_]

5 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

we ran the ball every time the box count wasn't overwhelmingly against us.

 

actually they didn't.  in the 3rd quarter I took notice of multiple times the bucs only had a 7 man box and the colts were still passing.  but again, many people, including Frank himself, are trying to say that the Bucs were stuffing the run the entire first half and that's simply not true.  both the run and pass started to open up in the 2nd quarter, hence Taylor's 5 ypc average.  Yes it was only 4 carries, but that's all it took to keep the defense honest.  No one is saying that Frank should have gone run heavy in the second half.  Not by any means.  But going 20+ plays without a rushing attempt when your team's biggest strength is the run blocking of the offensive line and the MVP candidate RB Taylor is just ridiculous.

8 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

He fired Grigson and ate three years of a new contract.   He fired Pagano and ate two years of a new contract. 

 

and this is why, imo, the argument that Frank isn't going anywhere because he just signed an extension really doesn't hold water.

[Colt.45]

3 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

actually they didn't.  in the 3rd quarter I took notice of multiple times the bucs only had a 7 man box and the colts were still passing.  but again, many people, including Frank himself, are trying to say that the Bucs were stuffing the run the entire first half and that's simply not true.  both the run and pass started to open up in the 2nd quarter, hence Taylor's 5 ypc average.  Yes it was only 4 carries, but that's all it took to keep the defense honest.  No one is saying that Frank should have gone run heavy in the second half.  Not by any means.  But going 20+ plays without a rushing attempt when your team's biggest strength is the run blocking of the offensive line and the MVP candidate RB Taylor is just ridiculous.

 

and this is why, imo, the argument that Frank isn't going anywhere because he just signed an extension really doesn't hold water.

I'm not sure what exactly your grouse is though.....Did the Colts not lead 24-14 at the half? Who cares if they passed instead of ran? Heck they were going to go up 31-14 with the classic double dip until Eric Fisher crapped the bed. 

Bruce Arians beat his chest after the game and said NO ONE runs on his team, he didnt say that because he was being the usual loudmouth he can be, he said it because that's a commitment they make. The Colts didnt pass because they're stubborn, they passed because it was the better play. 

Anyway, 6-6. Another narrow loss, we need more from our leaders IMHO

[Jason_]

3 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

I'm not sure what exactly your grouse is though.....Did the Colts not lead 24-14 at the half? Who cares if they passed instead of ran? Heck they were going to go up 31-14 with the classic double dip until Eric Fisher crapped the bed. 

 

 

by that point with so many consecutive pass plays, I was simply waiting for the turnover to happen.  even a couple of rushing attempts would have slowed down the pass rush.  and on top of that, it's far easier to wear down the opposing defensive line by running the ball and allowing our OL to attack them, rather than constantly passing the ball allowing their DL to attack our OL.

 

Quote

Bruce Arians beat his chest after the game and said NO ONE runs on his team, he didnt say that because he was being the usual loudmouth he can be, he said it because that's a commitment they make.

 

except that Taylor averaged over 5 yards per carry against them for the game.  Would he have been able to maintain that average if he'd had 10 more rushing attempts?  hard to say, but there's really nothing to suggest he wouldn't have been able to.  Because again, the Bucs really only stopped the running game in the first quarter.  After that, the running game was successful. 

 

Quote

The Colts didnt pass because they're stubborn, they passed because it was the better play. 

 

 

agree to disagree.  going almost a quarter and a half without a rushing attempt when that is the overwhelming strength of your team is never the better play.  going one dimensional collapsed the offense.  simply compare the point differential and turnover differential of the 2nd quarter vs. the 3rd.  or the 3rd vs the 4th.

[ClaytonColt]

3 hours ago, J@son said:

Just to be clear, the quarter and a half I'm talking about are the entire 3rd and almost first half of the 4th quarter.  The 2nd quarter was very pass heavy, BUT, they still did incorporate the run.  Taylor had 4 carries for 21 yards (over 5 ypc) in the 2nd quarter, which was overwhelmingly the most successful portion of the game. 

I agree - and without wishing to be pedantic because like you I enjoy the debate rather than nit picking or point scoring - I'm not sure that 4 runs within a spell of 27 plays is truly incorporating the run. If we'd have run 4 times in the 3rd quarter too I'm not sure it would have made anyone happier.

 

You're also right about my very general use of "you" - it's directed at the homogenous lump of 'the forum' rather than you as an individual. We as a fan base, and probably as individual fans too, probably do need to decide what characteristics we want from the team/coach. At the moment it just seems that the things people want flips backwards and forwards. 

 

4 hours ago, J@son said:

Whether Frank wants to pass to setup the run, or run to setup the pass...either way I don't care.  but the passing game works best when play action is utilized, and play action loses all of its effectiveness when the team goes one dimensional and abandons the run.  not to mention the chances of committing turnovers goes up exponentially when you go one dimensional. 

Once again - agree. However I'm not sure the regular theory of needing to run the ball to draw the defenders up and sell the play action completely applies to the Bucs game. Watching it back the Bucs were already committing to stopping the run even when we weren't even doing it! By actually rushing the ball we couldn't have sold them any harder into packing the box.

 

Take a look at the Winfield interception again as a perfect example - that was our 22nd consecutive passing play. The Bucs still had 8 in the box, the linebackers still bit on the playaction and we got the wide open one-on-one match up that we'd all have wanted for a deep jump ball. It's not like our one dimensional play calling had caused the Bucs to react and move towards covering the pass more. Even after 22 plays they were still setting up with the run in mind and giving us big play opportunities in the passing game so we need to exploit that.

 

In my mind we're built as a run first team, that's our strength. But if we come up against a strong run defense who truly commit to stopping our ground game regardless of what we call then we also have to be able to exploit that. To me that's almost more important that play calling balance. 

[Jason_]

9 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:

I agree - and without wishing to be pedantic because like you I enjoy the debate rather than nit picking or point scoring - I'm not sure that 4 runs within a spell of 27 plays is truly incorporating the run.

 

4 runs out of 27 plays is incorporating the run more than 0 runs in 27 plays  lol

[lollygagger8]

"Frank admitted that Todd Bowles is more creative/better at his job defending the run than he is scheming plays for the run game."

 

Riddle me this: When the Colts put an extra O-lineman in, it forced Bucs to take their 3 safety look off the field and put more D-linemen in. The run was working when they did this. Instead of "taking what the defense gave them, they forced the Defense to take what the Colts gave them. It was working, yet they quit doing it. WHY

 

 

[DougDew]

10 hours ago, J@son said:

 

you're way oversimplifying to try to justify your point.  It's not so much about one player as it is about completely ignoring one important aspect of the game....the running game.  if they took Taylor out and gave the carries to Jackson, Hines or Mack, that would have still been infinitely better than not attempting a run for over an entire quarter.

 

It was proven in the other threads that when the colts at least attempt to run the ball (even in a pass heavy offense with a 2:1 pass to run ratio):

 

-the colts commit far fewer turnovers

-the colts punt far less frequently

-the colts score more efficiently

 

something that won't show up on any stat sheet:  when run blocking, the offensive line gets to attack the opposing defensive line.  when pass blocking, the opposing defensive line gets to attack our offensive line.  it only stands to reason that the opposing defensive line will wear down far more quickly when they're being attacked than when they're doing the attacking.  this only helps the passing game by wearing down the opposing pass rushers.

 

even the great peyton manning wasn't able to beat teams all on his own.  the one time they had the most success from an offensive perspective in the playoffs was when he continued to utilize the running game with addai and rhodes.  how many years did the offense stink up the place in playoff games because peyton put everything on his shoulders and failed to utilize the running game, even when it was very successful in the regular season?  

 

Frank was given one of the best offensive lines in football which is one of the best in run blocking in the league, and maybe above average in pass blocking.  he wasn't scared to play to his strengths against buffalo so I can't even fathom why he refused to do the same against the bucs.  in his post game presser he tried to justify by saying the run wasn't working in the first quarter.  that's true.  what he failed to mention was that the run game was successful in the 2nd quarter and that's when the offense as a whole was the most effective and scored the most points.  

 

it's no coincidence that the colt's record is far better when they attempt at least 18-20+ rushes vs the very poor record in games when they rush for 15 or fewer.  spread the rushing attempts around to mack, hines, jackson and taylor if you want.  that's fine.  it's still keeping the defense honest.  though, it only makes sense to give as many as possible to the guy averaging over 5 ypc, even against the best rush defenses in the league.  one of the few non-qbs to get himself into the mvp conversation.  

No.  Using our best player more is the oversimplification.

 

Its not proven that when we run the ball at least once we commit fewer turnovers.  That just happens to be the way somebody complied a stat.  We also go 6 and 6 in 2021 when the game day sun rises in the East.  Or, we also have a certain WL record when the roof is open.  Having two turnovers when we throw 22 times in a row does not go towards proving a theory that we would not have committed two turnovers on pass plays if we sprinkled in 5 runs.

 

Ballard did not give Frank an oline to block 5 d lineman.  If you want to run in those situations....run because of an ideology, "you put the ball in the hands of your best player" ....then put 3 TEs in the game and line em up.  Pep used to do that as OC and at Stanford.

 

Maybe that's what Frank should have done.  Come out in the 3Q with 3 TEs.  Maybe.  It would pretty much limit the opportunities for versatility, sort of squashing the RPO decision.  And, it would also speak to nothing when we wanted to run the ball under normal formations against the TB plan.

[lollygagger8]

Also, if Hines is on the field, it should be at the same time JT is out there (that setup when they are both out there works more times than not) or it should only be to give JT a break and Hines is NOT running up the freakin middle. 

 

Also, we've seen enough of Hines at kick/punt returner. It's time to leave Rogers or Dulin back there. 

[DougDew]

10 hours ago, csmopar said:

I’m bashing both

Until Flus gets three new defensive starters next year. 

[DougDew]

9 hours ago, chad72 said:

To me, Ballard has to separate himself from Eberflus and see if the talent chosen can be maximized by someone else at DC. I would like to see how Jim Schwartz would do coaching our D. The guy I would also like to look at is Jerod Mayo with the Patriots who also serves as a co-defensive coordinator with Belichick, unless Belichick promotes him to DC, and we don't want to relive the McDaniels fiasco again, do we?  

Fair comment. 

 

I see Flus being dealt a bad had by Ballard because I'm biased against having to play with 6.2 270 tweeners (Lewis, although he's done well THIS year so far), and situational pass rushers.   I like the Paye and Dayo players better.  Also, Flus has been here 4 years?, there was a time where we were supposed to be a SEA 4-3 man defense at times, switching out all kinds of defensive plays, but RYS has shown that he can't cover his man for long periods.  Same with Willis.  Same with BoPete.  I'm also biased against switching coverages, because a man corner is different than a zone corner.

 

So I fall on the side of seeing what Flus can do when one defensive scheme is picked (a scheme that is compatible with players you have to play the other scheme with) and the overall talent is drafted for that scheme.  As a start towards that, I think Paye and Dayo are not uni-skilled players and will be able to play effectively against the run and pass, similar to Defo.  A 4 man front should have guys who play the run and pass rush well, not rotate in and out based on specialty, JMO.

 

But I like Schwartz as a DC too,

[Btown_Colt]

4 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

@Btown_Colt, you got onto me earlier for me saying you wanted Frank gone, you said you didn't. I apologized for it because I thought you did. This thread proves you do, you wrote a book ripping him, I mean 6 different paragraphs explaining what Frank said was concerning and what he did wrong  . Just admit it, you want him out. I am ok with it but I think he is a good coach. I guess everytime we lose a game, I should expect this kind of thread from at least 3 or 4 people. Yeah Frank should've used Taylor more, Bowles is a genius  - what was Frank supposed to say, that Bowles couldn't carry my jock strap and he got lucky today at the guessing game . We lost to the SB Champions against the greatest QB ever and a great run D, by a measly 7 points. It is not like we lost to Humpty Dumpty and his little Texans.

I don’t know what to tell you, but I never said I want him out. I find it concerning, I find his comments concerning and his in game decisions/play calls concerning. Being critical and questioning him doesn’t = wanting him fired. But you obviously know me better than I do. 

[chad72]

39 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

"Frank admitted that Todd Bowles is more creative/better at his job defending the run than he is scheming plays for the run game."

 

Riddle me this: When the Colts put an extra O-lineman in, it forced Bucs to take their 3 safety look off the field and put more D-linemen in. The run was working when they did this. Instead of "taking what the defense gave them, they forced the Defense to take what the Colts gave them. It was working, yet they quit doing it. WHY

 

 

 

That is what Belichick did when Brady was throwing picks to Cromartie and company in their undefeated regular season 2007 AFCCG. Added an extra OL and TE and decided to pass less and run more....and it worked!!! 

[chad72]

 

Just sharing what I posted in an earlier thread about how the threat of a run is about OL and D rhythm, and how you keep a D on the edge even if the run is not yielding tons of yards plus the impact of burning clock and keeping D's legs fresh.

 

Plus, to me it is never as simple as run vs pass, but the point about maximizing offensive talents and minimizing weaknesses is a valid one. Wentz has not shown to me that if he has to chuck it 40 times or more, he is capable of not turning it over a couple of times. Ravens game truly was about Blankenship and Eberflus, good teams would have finished the deal with D and special teams there, to be honest. Wentz did not throw a pick in the Ravens game and we never got the ball back in OT. Wentz however did throw 2 picks in both the Titans and Bucs games attempting 51 and 44 passes respectively.

[Btown_Colt]

2 hours ago, J@son said:

 

If the Colts were losing games because they were simply outmatched by superior teams, that would be one thing.  However that hasn't been the case for the most part.  They're losing games because their HC, who should know the team better than everyone else...whose job it is to put his best players in the best position to succeed, forgets about the overwhelming strength of his team for quarters and even games at a time. 

 

There's a reason the commentators spent almost the entire 3rd quarter totally bewildered by the fact that Taylor hadn't touched the ball.  There's a reason the cameraman kept centering on the fan wearing the "Run the Damn Ball" hat.  There's a reason that the very first questions Frank was asked in his post game presser were about him completely abandoning the run in the second half until there was a little over 9 min left in the game.   There's a reason that literally every post I scrolled through on the Colts instagram after the game was bashing frank for abandoning the run. 

Nah Greg Olsen…what’s he know about anything. The local media knows

more because Frank told them what to think.

[CoachLite]

10 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah that is another thing nobody is factoring in, Wentz probably audible to a lot of passes because the Bucs were stacking to stop the run. At that point it is out of Frank's hands. None of us really know how much leeway Wentz has?

Stacking the box does not mean that you can't run the ball successfully. Just because a team shows an initial defensive scheme does not mean they won't shift out. If Wentz and Reich were on the same page strategically, the actual play run, tactically, wouldn't make so much difference. It's what you (both Wentz and Reich) have learned about your opponent's behavior patterns that matter. The whole game becomes a learning experience, and that's where continual adjustments must be made. Playcalling is not just a string of randomly called plays. Each play is a lesson.

 

How many times have we been suckered by misdirection plays?

 

At the professional level, the game of football is much more sophisticated than it is in high school. It's like comparing a game of chess to checkers.

[gspdx]

16 hours ago, hoosierhawk said:

We will never win big with FR. Not based on yesterday but his total body of work.

 

With that kind of logic Bill Belichick would never have won since he had 4 years at Cleveland and had a losing record.

 

Based on his total body of work we don't know anything.  Some of the greatest successes - and I am not just talking football - have come from people who failed many times in their past.  One of the hallmarks of success is to not just quit when you fail.

 

I am not saying we will win big with FR, I am saying nobody knows the future.

[DougDew]

9 hours ago, Btown_Colt said:

1. He admits to wanting to abandon the run before the game ever started. He claims he was patient with the run to start the game, but it just wasn’t working. I agree the 1st quarter it wasn’t, but the pass wasn’t either. It absolutely was starting to work in the 2nd though. Why was he comfortable giving the pass game time to get going, but not the run?

 

Because he watched TBs 11 previous games, also seeing what other offenses did that worked and what didn't.

 

9 hours ago, Btown_Colt said:

2. He admits that Todd Bowles is more

creative/better at his job defending the run than he is scheming plays for the run game. Again, this doesn’t give me a boost of confidence going forward.

You really don't scheme running plays like you do pass plays.  You line up with 3 TEs, or have a Fullback on the roster, etc.  Doyle wouldn't work because the LB/DB who was responsible for Doyle would just play the run now.  You could run jet sweeps, but if TB had 5 dlinemen, I would think JPP and Barrett could line up a half a step outside and change the scheme relative to how Fisher and Smith are used to blocking it.

 

9 hours ago, Btown_Colt said:

3. He claims the execution was fine and the pass game was working…yet they kept turning the ball over and scored 0 points in the 3rd.

As has been mentioned elsewhere.  Sacks and picks happen on pass plays.  There is nothing to materially say that sacks and picks on pass plays don't happen when you sprinkle in 5 runs along the way.  In fact, I would think that stats show that sacks and picks happen even when there is run/pass balance.  What you need to see is the sack or pick per attempt rate.  But a sack or pick per attempt is better when measured over a season and not compared to a 22 attempt portion of the season.  Stats can be lumpy when a small universe of data is chosen.

9 hours ago, Btown_Colt said:

4. He wishes The D could have held the Bucs to field goals when they turned the  ball over and gave Brady a short field but then later says he knew it was gonna be tough to hold Brady to less than 30 and really didn’t do much to help his D out by becoming one dimensional in the 3rd

One is hope, the other painful acknowledgement of reality about what your defense is.  What he did not want to do was to start to milk the clock when up by "two scores" (LOL, 10 pts not 14).  We scored 24 in the first half.  We were moving the ball until turning it over in the 3Q.  Again, sprinkling in 5 runs does not mean that we would not have had turnovers on the pass plays.  Most turnovers on pass plays happen in the NFL when runs are called several plays before.  Look it up.  Anybody can play the stats game.

 

9 hours ago, Btown_Colt said:

5. He said the Bucs were showing a stacked box in the 4th then bailing out to play pass, that’s why the run worked

in the 4th. But he didn’t even attempt a run in the 3rd, so how does know know the same wouldn’t have been true in the 3rd?

Fair point.  But I don't know if that's something that Wentz or Frank would have expected to happen if there was no precedent for it before.  They could have tried a few running plays and found out if TB would have done that in the 3Q, but judging him against such a narrow speculation that nobody here suggested would happen until Frank just said it is looking for a reason to bash Frank, IMO.

 

9 hours ago, Btown_Colt said:

6. He didn’t want to talk about the 2nd quarter or first half in general and unfortunately none of the media had the sense to ask why he didn’t continue to call plays like he did in the 2nd quarter.

Media and forums focus on negativity.  The first half was positive.

[chad72]

8 hours ago, Nesjan3 said:

Franks a good coach, terrible play caller its pretty simple actually.

 

Far from it. He is an excellent play caller too. The combination of being HC and being a play caller sometimes requires an outside observation regarding the flow of the game and the D teeing off tendencies, that is truly the only shortfall that shows up against good teams. The flip side is, the D is not there yet to hold the fort down to a FG when a turnover happens or generate stops when needed, especially as the game goes on with the undersized speedy D philosophy. So, the burden of the O needing to protect the D with lesser margin for error will show up against the better teams and it has, IMO.

[Franklin County]

If Frank had sprinkled in just 4 more runs in the 3rd quarter, is there 3 minutes left on the clock for TB to score the go ahead score? Would more runs benefit the defense? Yes. Would more runs help keep Tommy Boy off the field longer? Yes. Would Frank have been in my office getting his ear ripped off after the game if I was Ballard? Yes!!! Do I think Frank needs fired? No. Do I think Frank needs to hand play calling off to his Offensive Coordinator? Yes. Do I think Frank will learn not to forget he has a MVP level running back on his team for quarters at a time? No. Bottom line is Frank has no intentions of changing what he is doing and the team record indicates that. This roster is good enough to make a deep run in the play offs but I fear they will all be at Grover"s house eating ribs and watching it from the couch.

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

 

Just sharing what I posted in an earlier thread about how the threat of a run is about OL and D rhythm, and how you keep a D on the edge even if the run is not yielding tons of yards plus the impact of burning clock and keeping D's legs fresh.

 

Plus, to me it is never as simple as run vs pass, but the point about maximizing offensive talents and minimizing weaknesses is a valid one. Wentz has not shown to me that if he has to chuck it 40 times or more, he is capable of not turning it over a couple of times. Ravens game truly was about Blankenship and Eberflus, good teams would have finished the deal with D and special teams there, to be honest. Wentz did not throw a pick in the Ravens game and we never got the ball back in OT. Wentz however did throw 2 picks in both the Titans and Bucs games attempting 51 and 44 passes respectively.

That's all true, but, it says nothing about that being the reason for that pick or that sack.  You cannot say that calling run plays several plays before would have stopped the turnovers. 

 

As has been mentioned, most sacks and picks happen on pass plays when running plays were called several plays before.

 

IMO, the reason that we lost is not because we got Franked by wonky play calling in the 3rd QTR of a game, its because we gave up 37 points.  Some of which was the result of blitzing and stunting, which has been strongly presented as an occasional elixir to soft zone scheme.

[ADnum1]

I think many are missing the point that passing 27 times in a row led to at least 2 turnovers.  It is cause and effect.

 

The under throw to Pittman and the strip sack.

 

Jeff Saturday was on a ESPN show and he said this :

 

"I have a problem with not having the ball in your best players hands.  Look no further than the other sideline and how the Bucs kept Fournette involved.  Short passes and they kept giving him touches.  You have to keep giving Taylor touches as he can break one any time and score.  To not give touches to Taylor for long periods of time was a huge mistake.  He's the MVP of the league.  Carson Wentz played well but not well enough to win the game".

 

Also who cares if the Bucs were stacking the box and selling out on stopping the run ?  The Bills were the number 1 run defense in the league at the time we played and we ran all over them.

 

Sometimes you play strength against strength.  True they shut it down in the 1st quarter, but DLines get tired as the game goes on.  Thats why they they say never abandon the run.

[Nesjan3]

2 days later everyone in the world is saying the same thing a lot of posters here are saying.

 

You dont throw 20+ times in a row, you dont abandon the run especially when you have the best RB in the league, when your up you play to win, you dont play not to lose. You dont let Carson throw 40+ times ever, he will make mistakes.

 

The only people saying different are Colts fans trying desperately to defend Frank.

[DougDew]

8 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:

I think many are missing the point that passing 27 times in a row led to at least 2 turnovers.  It is cause and effect.

 

The under throw to Pittman and the strip sack.

 

Jeff Saturday was on a ESPN show and he said this :

 

"I have a problem with not having the ball in your best players hands.  Look no further than the other sideline and how the Bucs kept Fournette involved.  Short passes and they kept giving him touches.  You have to keep giving Taylor touches as he can break one any time and score.  To not give touches to Taylor for long periods of time was a huge mistake.  He's the MVP of the league.  Carson Wentz played well but not well enough to win the game".

 

Also who cares if the Bucs were stacking the box and selling out on stopping the run ?  The Bills were the number 1 run defense in the league at the time we played and we ran all over them.

 

Sometimes you play strength against strength.  True they shut it down in the 1st quarter, but DLines get tired as the game goes on.  Thats why they they say never abandon the run.

Agreed.  That's a great ideology to follow.  But there is no way to calibrate the consequences of not following the ideology when the defense gives up 37 points.  If we play the what if game, what if the ball is not underthrown and we get a completion there.

[DougDew]

2 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

2 days later everyone in the world is saying the same thing a lot of posters here are saying.

 

You dont throw 20+ times in a row, you dont abandon the run especially when you have the best RB in the league, when your up you play to win, you dont play not to lose. You dont let Carson throw 40+ times ever, he will make mistakes.

 

The only people saying different are Colts fans trying desperately to defend Frank.

Are you saying that wonky play calling in the 3rd qtr of a game is responsible for losing more than giving up 37 points?

 

What's the point of harping on the icing JT thing if its immaterial relative to bigger issues?

 

If you want to look at games as a reason to find fault with Frank, fine, but most of us on the other side want the Colts to win football games.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

13 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That's all true, but, it says nothing about that being the reason for that pick or that sack.  You cannot say that calling run plays several plays before would have stopped the turnovers. 

 

As has been mentioned, most sacks and picks happen on pass plays when running plays were called several plays before.

 

IMO, the reason that we lost is not because we got Franked by wonky play calling in the 3rd QTR of a game, its because we gave up 37 points.  Some of which was the result of blitzing and stunting, which has been strongly presented as an occasional elixir to soft zone scheme.

This is correct. We could of run 4 times in a row before the strip sack and just happen to get that strip sack on the one pass play.  

[Nesjan3]

Just now, DougDew said:

Are you saying that wonky play calling in the 3rd qtr of a game is responsible for losing more than giving up 37 points?

 

What's the point of harping on the icing JT thing is its immaterial relative to bigger issues?

The defense was terrible as well but this is becoming something Frank is known for. 6 blown double digit leads in 3 and 3 quarter seasons. Go back and watch the film of all those games its the exact same thing everytime. We are 0-4 this season alone when Frank tries to put the game in Carson's hands. The team has talent. The playcalling and defensive coordinator is holding us back,

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Just now, Nesjan3 said:

The defense was terrible as well but this is becoming something Frank is known for. 6 blown double digit leads in 3 and 3 quarter seasons. Go back and watch the film of all those games its the exact same thing everytime. We are 0-4 this season alone when Frank tries to put the game in Carson's hands. The team has talent. The playcalling and defensive coordinator is holding us back,

So defense has no responsibility in blowing leads. Our bad pass rush is one of the biggest culprits for blowing leads. If this defense can get 50% better next season this team is going to be unstoppable with how many points they score so easily.

[Nesjan3]

Just now, Wentzszn said:

So defense has no responsibility in blowing leads. Our bad pass rush is one of the biggest culprits for blowing leads. If this defense can get 50% better next season this team is going to be unstoppable with how many points they score so easily.

It clearly says in my post that the defense is also responsible as well. Its a team sport, but Frank is the head coach and the playcaller and he has no clue how to close out games with the run game, he should be feeling heat.

[DougDew]

2 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

The defense was terrible as well but this is becoming something Frank is known for. 6 blown double digit leads in 3 and 3 quarter seasons. Go back and watch the film of all those games its the exact same thing everytime. We are 0-4 this season alone when Frank tries to put the game in Carson's hands. The team has talent. The playcalling and defensive coordinator is holding us back,

Carson doesn't play defense.  Its not like he's been Andrew Luck and putting the defense into bad field positions.

 

The problem is having not enough talent on defense to hold off the more talented playoff caliber offenses when it matters.

 

[ADnum1]

3 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

• The presser was what I expected. 
• I'm fine with passing more than running. I don't want to be stubborn trying to pound the ball if it's not working. I'm not fine however with 25ish passes without a run. 
• We became one dimensional which is what Bowles wanted us to do. A few runs here and there sprinkled in would have kept TB honest, and a few edge runs, end arounds, or sweeps vs a run blitz would have likely changed Bowles' play calling (they would have to stop clogging so much).
• Even Frank admits we ripped a long one vs a heavy box.... So that in itself means a heavy box is not impossible to run against. He also said they had heavy boxes and at times dropped out of them. But he still ran against the heavy box "look"... So why not run against the look in the 3rd? Why wait till your down just because there's likely a better chance they drop out. If you're confident in the pass, why not keep throwing it...
• Still don't want Frank fired, but I do want him to give up play calling. He's just not good situationally. This week, his early scripts didn't work either. His 2Q worked. His 1st, 3rd, and 4th didn't. IMO, he probably should have come out throwing in the 1Q, then start sprinkling in runs once the passes starting to work. Thought for sure we'd see more edge runs especially with their run blitzing, but nope.

I mentioned in the other thread that the Bills had the number 1 run defense in the league when we played them.

 

Not any more .  We ran all over them.

 

Also the teams the Bucs have played prior to us did not have Jonathan Taylor, the MVP of the league.

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Are you saying that wonky play calling in the 3rd qtr of a game is responsible for losing more than giving up 37 points?

 

What's the point of harping on the icing JT thing if its immaterial relative to bigger issues?

 

If you want to look at games as a reason to find fault with Frank, fine, but most of us on the other side want the Colts to win football games.

 

Who is the HC? Does the DC not report to the HC? Does the HC not sign off on scheme and defensive game plan. Does the HC not have a part in the D players drafted?

 

And also, our D has been the same for years. We knew Brady would likely kill our soft zone. And people have complained and complained... But not much has changed. 

 

Everyone wants to win. Our D did what most expected our D to do. Give up yards and points, and get a few turnovers. Not many expected JT to be iced for 25+ plays, especially the game after colts.com publishes an article about how successful he is against a stacked box.... oh the irony.... lol

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:

I mentioned in the other thread that the Bills had the number 1 run defense in the league when we played them.

 

Not any more .  We ran all over them.

 

Also the teams the Bucs have played prior to us did not have Jonathan Taylor, the MVP of the league.

 

We didn't need to run it every time, just needed to be more creative with the run game, and sprinkle it in... not abandon it. 

And yup, Bills WERE #1 lol... and they stacked the box a ton. Frank just fell into Bowles's trap. 

[IrsaysArmy]

17 hours ago, Colt.45 said:

Ah yes, he chose Trubisky over some other no-name QBs because that was the way to go, khalil mack is worse than any colts pass rusher over the time period, allen robinson is worse than any colts wide receiver over the time. 

If you've watched the chicago bears play football over the last few years and thought whoever was running that ship should coach the colts instead of the present coaching staff then there is no point debating further.

Nagy drafting Trubisky over Watson and Mahomes is a downright fireable offense. 

[chad72]

56 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That's all true, but, it says nothing about that being the reason for that pick or that sack.  You cannot say that calling run plays several plays before would have stopped the turnovers. 

 

As has been mentioned, most sacks and picks happen on pass plays when running plays were called several plays before.

 

IMO, the reason that we lost is not because we got Franked by wonky play calling in the 3rd QTR of a game, its because we gave up 37 points.  Some of which was the result of blitzing and stunting, which has been strongly presented as an occasional elixir to soft zone scheme.

 

No, that is not the reason for the strip sack, I agree. Frank is a bit burdened with the fact that the O is the identity of this team and not the D. Good teams overcome plays made against them, and our D is not the kind to blitz like the Ravens or Steelers or even the Bucs, by nature, to FORCE stops. So there is added pressure on the O to carry this team more, IMO.

 

Offensively, Red zone is a place where in the past, even Peyton, who would have passed more between the 20s, realized he had to call runs there since the zones shrink and the QB will end up holding the ball longer as a result unless it is a quick release play, which is not how Wentz operates. So, whether there were 10 pass plays prior to the red zone or not, the red zone does have a bigger place for the run game than between the 20s, IMO, unless the clock is a factor at the end of the half or the end of the game. 

[Colt.45]

2 hours ago, J@son said:

 

by that point with so many consecutive pass plays, I was simply waiting for the turnover to happen.  even a couple of rushing attempts would have slowed down the pass rush.  and on top of that, it's far easier to wear down the opposing defensive line by running the ball and allowing our OL to attack them, rather than constantly passing the ball allowing their DL to attack our OL.

 

 

except that Taylor averaged over 5 yards per carry against them for the game.  Would he have been able to maintain that average if he'd had 10 more rushing attempts?  hard to say, but there's really nothing to suggest he wouldn't have been able to.  Because again, the Bucs really only stopped the running game in the first quarter.  After that, the running game was successful. 

 

 

agree to disagree.  going almost a quarter and a half without a rushing attempt when that is the overwhelming strength of your team is never the better play.  going one dimensional collapsed the offense.  simply compare the point differential and turnover differential of the 2nd quarter vs. the 3rd.  or the 3rd vs the 4th.

We will agree to disagree.

I have no qualms with passing and passing, and passing some more. 

I appreciate your take though and i can see the reasoning.

[Colt.45]

2 minutes ago, IrsaysArmy said:

Nagy drafting Trubisky over Watson and Mahomes is a downright fireable offense. 

The GM and Nagy should be sent to the NFL version of Siberia. Like many of us, i've got Bears fans in the family....the levels of depression and apathy have hit levels that i never saw in decades.