Post Week 12 Reich Grievances Thread (MEGA MERGE)

[shasta519]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

40 years of NFL history?  Its not just this game that provided the universe of data here.  Just like its not this game that creates the ideology that we should have balance.

 

 I doubt that most interceptions in the NFL happen only when a drive has no runs.  In fact, unless its 2 minutes, almost all drives always have runs sprinkled in, and yet interceptions and strip sacks happen on those drives.  The 2021 Colts have had interceptions and sacks on drives where we have sprinkled in runs.  The fact that it did not happen in the 1st half does not mean it wont in the 3Q.

 

So sprinkling in runs do not prevent turnovers on passing plays.  

 

You have to play the what if game to assume that the turnovers would not have happened, and what if 6'4 best WR on the club beats 5'9 FS on that good decision to throw?  The strip sack turnover becomes even less impactful, and Wentz might start staying with the run option more.

 

But, given that's its Brady against our defense in the second half when it matters, we probably lose anyway. 

 

That's why I have a hard time getting dramatic over Frank.  

 

Exactly right. TOs happen on drives with runs all the time. Runs those drives could have led to the exact same scenario. So really people are being critical of individual plays. And we should be critical...but not of the play call...but of the players who didn't execute.

 

People are getting hung up on being 0 runs over a few drives. Sure, they could have sprinkled in a few runs, but the over-arching point is that staying pass-heavy like they did was definitely the right call...and it was moving the ball.  That is what TB was giving them...just like TB gave them the run game on that TD drive late in the 4Q.

 

And I am sure we can find examples of teams staying pass-heavy in the 2nd half even when up by two scores. KC did it last year against this same...even when they were up 13 points at half. 

 

Looking over the past 40 years is sort of pointless anyways given how the NFL has changed dramatically over that time. But I am sure we can find examples of teams being up by two scores trying to chew the clock and letting the other team come back and win.

 

But when you have an offense like TB down, you keep your foot on the gas. 

[Colt.45]

2 hours ago, shasta519 said:

 

Nots sure what point he is making. I guess he is giving Reich the credit for the offense. I think he certainly deserves some credit and I have supported his playcalling in the past, but let's add some real context to what Reich has done in the passing game without elite weapons.

 

First, they have an elite weapon...by far the most productive skill position player in the NFL, who has been the catalyst for the offense and whose impact cannot be understated. I would say the passing game is working more because of Taylor than it is in spite of the overall talent. 

 

Second, the defense leads the league in TOs, which has given them a top 5 average starting position and tied them for the second-most drives. And they have been pretty fortunate with penalties on offense. Disciplined play shouldn't be something to ding them on though which is what this comes off as. Dungy had teams that were the least penalized YoY. 

 

Third, pts/game is not the end-all be-all stat for an offense. And for stats like pts/drive, yds/drive and Drive Success Rate, the Colts are certainly top 10, but not quite the offense that KC, LAR, ARI and TB are. And while those teams have been efficient at running the ball, they don't have elite RBs like Taylor (would be scary if they did). KC has Tyreek, Kelce and Pat. The Rams have Stafford, Kupp, ODB (Rob Wood before he got hurt). Arizona has Murray, Green, Hop, Kirk, Rondale. TB has Brady, Gronk, Evans, Godwin, AB, etc etc. The Colts are not quite those offenses but the only pass catcher who may be in the same league as the guys the other teams have is Pittman. 

 

Can the passing game get to that level of those teams? Maybe. If it can, then having an advantage like Taylor gives them a chance to have the best offense in the NFL. But Holder is right that they definitely need to add a couple of pass catchers.

 

3 out of the 4 years Reich has coached Indy, he's put out top 10 offensive teams. That's a wild stat especially when you consider the personnel available.

[Four2itus]

I posted "Never underestimate the desire to be right". I must amend that to...

 

"Never underestimate the desire to be right, when a person feels they have been wronged". 

[Goatface Killah]

2 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Wondering how many of these Frank/Wentz bashers have made note of how Vea tossed Q around like a rag doll?

 And several of the complainers speak of the need to replace Fisher next year. I would say he is playing as well or better than we got out of AC his last couple years. He is slightly quicker, and is very relentless run blocking.

When he has been playing very well, getting better week to week.

 Lots of silliness.

  

Vita Vea had 1 tackle. He lost that many teeth. 

 

"Tossed him around like a rag doll".

 

This dude is legendary. 1 tackle and he dominated. 

 

Are you sure you guys arent Bucs fans?

 

 

[hoosierhawk]

On 11/30/2021 at 1:47 AM, coltsblue1844 said:

I used facts...no one has ran against Tampa this year. The best coach in the NFL ran less than 10x for the game...because you take what the D gives you, sometimes. 

 

Had we forced the run and failed...but just kept doing it anyhow, would that have made you happy?

The best coach in the NFL has a running group that as a whole has rushed for 1384 yds combined on the year for a 4.1 yd ave. Taylor alone has run for 1205 yds for a 5.8 ave. That's like comparing apples and carrots.

No one ever suggested we only run the ball against TB but we mix the play calling to keep the D honest and run some clock in the 2nd half. 

[hoosierhawk]

On 11/30/2021 at 2:13 AM, ClaytonColt said:

I think the press conference is fine, I actually appreciate him coming out and explaining some of the details with facts to back it up.

 

To some degree it's a no win situation for Reich. The pass was working first half so if he automatically goes away from that and we lose I bet a load of people would accuse him of going conservative. If you don't win there's always something to complain about - which doesn't mean that it's not sometimes valid - but whichever way he choose to go second half there would be something to nail him with.

Are you saying that anyone has suggested we abandon the pass entirely and go strictly to the run in the 2nd half. I have heard no one even remotely suggest that. Nice try but way off base. People are only suggesting we mix up the play calling to keep them guessing. One run out of 3 or 4 attempts would even have been more effective then 26 passes in a row especially when you have on off the best rushing OLs in the league and the league leading rusher.

[DougDew]

43 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

And I am sure we can find examples of teams staying pass-heavy in the 2nd half even when up by two scores. KC did it last year against this same...even when they were up 13 points at half. 

I cant believe that people are suggesting that we try to milk the clock when we are up 10 points (they say 2 scores, LOL) against Tom Brady with 30 minutes left in the game....or 20 minutes......or 10 minutes.

 

Look at us trying to milk the clock by running a lot at BALT in the 3Q.  Lamar even came back on us, but that was then described by the critics as Flus' fault and not Frank's fault.

[chad72]

@Nadine @Shive @w87r - Can we do an "All Things Frank Reich" merge thread now before we get more Frank Reich threads?  

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

34 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

 

3 out of the 4 years Reich has coached Indy, he's put out top 10 offensive teams. That's a wild stat especially when you consider the personnel available.

Add to that the 4 different QB. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

33 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

Vita Vea had 1 tackle. He lost that many teeth. 

 

"Tossed him around like a rag doll".

 

This dude is legendary. 1 tackle and he dominated. 

 

Are you sure you guys arent Bucs fans?

 

 

You do realize tackling is not what a dline does at his position. His Job is to move bodies and clog up running lanes.

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, chad72 said:

@Nadine @Shive @w87r - Can we do an "All Things Frank Reich" merge thread now before we get more Frank Reich threads?  

We wouldn't have any threads at all then........

[hoosierhawk]

On 11/30/2021 at 6:45 AM, EastStreet said:

 

•  
• Still don't want Frank fired, but I do want him to give up play calling.  

Agree 100%.  Give up play calling and coach the team and the coaches. 

[Colt.45]

34 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

You really think the Bucs sold out to stop the run 27 plays in a row, AFTER they had already been torched with deep passing? That would be every bit as dumb as passing it 27 times in a row. Todd Bowles is known for disguising defensive looks very well and isnt nearly that stupid. 

 

Cmon man.

 

 

 

The Bucs disguised things all right but their strategy (which is a different thing from their tactics) was clear. Stop the run (they were going to do that come hell or high water). Whatever the disguised run blitzes were, the strategy was the same. That's the point i was getting at.

 

Now, we can get into the nuances of what they did on those attempts but first lets get some context into this thing. We're really looking at 14/15 consecutive pass plays not 26. The whole crying about 26 pass plays in a row smacks of the same energy as a 4 or 5 year old who is determined to cry/whine no matter what. Anyone who has raised kids will know instantly what i'm talking about. That's what fans are doing right now. It wasn't 26 attempts because the pass attempts in the 1st half came when the Colts were in a 2min drill. Unless folks are saying our 2min drill should have consisted of 50:50 run:pass in which case, well i'd like to smoke some of that good stuff too so i can zone out of life's problems. So, okay, the Colts came out in the second half swinging the football...14/15 straight times. LEt's center the debate around that number not 26? Fair? 14/15.

 

We have John Waylon on this thread who's doing his homework right now looking for instances of a team passing several times in a row (20 is his number) etc because he's so determined to prove the coach is a smart alec who thinks he knows too much, and folks like that who're just so peeved that we passed so much. I'm not sure if you're one of them but hey I enjoy chatting/debating with you so lets break this down?

 

How many of those 2nd half attempts (the 14/15 consecutive passes) were RPOs? Frank said 7 i think or was it 9? I dont recall the exact number. Either way, roughly about half of the attempts in question, the QB read the defense (basically counted the numbers) and chose the passing option (and averaged 7yds a pop on those attempts). When Frank says he regrets none of the play calling, i tend to agree because if half the calls were with a run element and the QB rejected that run element based on what the defense showed him, how are we blaming the HC for this? Should the QB just have run the ball into the teeth of a swarming run defense just because it'd keep them 'honest'? Well no, we tried that at the start of the game, it was a huge waste of time. It's Tom Brady on the other side, it's the defending world champs not the NY Jets. If there was a game to go for the jugular, this was it. We were not beating them by faffing about, and we were not beating them with FGs. You go out and you play aggressively. Same thing we did against Buffalo except we ran instead of passing. It's the logic behind the actions not the actions themselves and that's what people are seemingly knocking Frank for and that's unfair, the logic was totally sound. We should have executed better PERIOD. You dont win against the Jets when you lose the turnover battle 2 to 1. The fact that we had any chance at all just shows how solid our gameplan (and ability to adjust) was.

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

Agree 100%.  Give up play calling and coach the team and the coaches. 

Yup. I don't think people understand that both HC (general) and play calling are big time responsibilities. It's hard to do both at a high level. I'm sure Frank get's help with HC part given he has to spend a ton of time game planning and play calling, but it's two big jobs on one guy. I love what he brings as a guy, and just wish he would focus on the bigger things. Let someone else put 100% focus on play calling. No shame in that. 

[Goatface Killah]

Just now, Wentzszn said:

You do realize tackling is not what a dline does at his position. His Job is to move bodies and clog up running lanes.

Chloe I actually liked you better when you were throwing hissy fits after every loss, you were far less annoying then. And cackling after everything you say makes you seem unstable more than anything. You might think youre smarter than me when it comes to football, but I dont really care. But laughing at my opinions isnt the way to show it.

 

Anyways, when I watch the game, I watch the lineplay because they reshow every play and you actually get a better view of the play the 2nd time around anyways. And I love lineplay. And yes I know Vea is never gonna make a lot of tackles. But he does typically get more than 1.

 

Vita Vea won some reps, no doubt about that. He even beat a double team by Q AND Ryan Kelly on a play. And yes Q had his hands full and Ive never seen him challenged the way he was. I mean Vea has 20 lbs on him, comparable athleticism and Q also has a bum ankle, so that makes sense. 

 

But i also am not overly dramatic like you or throwingbbz and dont exaggerate things. 

 

Q and Ryan Kelly also pancaked him at least once, which never happens to him. He is almost impossible to move, even by 2 players. 

 

But to act like he just ragdolled Quenton Nelson all game is not only untrue, its ridiculous and overly dramatic.

 

 

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, Tsarquise said:

Pts/game kind of is the end all be all. That's the whole "point" of the game. 

 

You really didn't get his "point"?

 

I don't think you're the greatest at understanding "points".

 

Ok. I said pts/game wasn't the end-all be-all stat/measure of an offense. So no need to intentionally quote half of what I said to make your "point." And it's certainly not the best measure of a passing offense, which is only part of the offense.

 

To his credit, Holder actually says that they are other ways to measure an offense in a response in that Twitter thread.

 

Holder wants more WRs...everybody wants that. That's not some unique idea.

 

What I don't see is how the passing game has been so impressive in spite of its talent...that was the part I was referring to. Because pts/game is a team offense stats. And their pts/game might be top 5, but the passing game itself has been much more middle of the pack. So using that stat and "THIS group of WRs" as the only context to give Reich and Wentz "a ton of credit" is disingenuous.

 

 

[hoosierhawk]

9 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Yup. I don't think people understand that both HC (general) and play calling are big time responsibilities. It's hard to do both at a high level. I'm sure Frank get's help with HC part given he has to spend a ton of time game planning and play calling, but it's two big jobs on one guy. I love what he brings as a guy, and just wish he would focus on the bigger things. Let someone else put 100% focus on play calling. No shame in that. 

There is a reason that only 8 HCs out 32 call their own plays.

[Goatface Killah]

11 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

 

The Bucs disguised things all right but their strategy (which is a different thing from their tactics) was clear. Stop the run (they were going to do that come hell or high water). Whatever the disguised run blitzes were, the strategy was the same. That's the point i was getting at.

 

Now, we can get into the nuances of what they did on those attempts but first lets get some context into this thing. We're really looking at 14/15 consecutive pass plays not 26. The whole crying about 26 pass plays in a row smacks of the same energy as a 4 or 5 year old who is determined to cry/whine no matter what. Anyone who has raised kids will know instantly what i'm talking about. That's what fans are doing right now. It wasn't 26 attempts because the pass attempts in the 1st half came when the Colts were in a 2min drill. Unless folks are saying our 2min drill should have consisted of 50:50 run:pass in which case, well i'd like to smoke some of that good stuff too so i can zone out of life's problems. So, okay, the Colts came out in the second half swinging the football...14/15 straight times. LEt's center the debate around that number not 26? Fair? 14/15.

 

We have John Waylon on this thread who's doing his homework right now looking for instances of a team passing several times in a row (20 is his number) etc because he's so determined to prove the coach is a smart alec who thinks he knows too much, and folks like that who're just so peeved that we passed so much. I'm not sure if you're one of them but hey I enjoy chatting/debating with you so lets break this down?

 

How many of those 2nd half attempts (the 14/15 consecutive passes) were RPOs? Frank said 7 i think or was it 9? I dont recall the exact number. Either way, roughly about half of the attempts in question, the QB read the defense (basically counted the numbers) and chose the passing option (and averaged 7yds a pop on those attempts). When Frank says he regrets none of the play calling, i tend to agree because if half the calls were with a run element and the QB rejected that run element based on what the defense showed him, how are we blaming the HC for this? Should the QB just have run the ball into the teeth of a swarming run defense just because it'd keep them 'honest'? Well no, we tried that at the start of the game, it was a huge waste of time. It's Tom Brady on the other side, it's the defending world champs not the NY Jets. If there was a game to go for the jugular, this was it. We were not beating them by faffing about, and we were not beating them with FGs. You go out and you play aggressively. Same thing we did against Buffalo except we ran instead of passing. It's the logic behind the actions not the actions themselves and that's what people are seemingly knocking Frank for and that's unfair, the logic was totally sound. We should have executed better PERIOD. You dont win against the Jets when you lose the turnover battle 2 to 1. The fact that we had any chance at all just shows how solid our gameplan (and ability to adjust) was.

Keep talking smack. You aint bothering me with your crying accusations, its complete nonsense. You can try to make it personal but it just makes you look bad. Nothing you are saying is true at all.

 

You keep wanting to change the scenario to favor you.

 

They called a ton of passes passes in a row. Thats the facts.

 

You've tried labeling some of those plays RPOs, which arent run plays. Because you know its foolish.

 

Now youre trying to remove half of them. Why? Because you know its foolish 

 

You also are constantly putting words into other peoples mouths to create a favorable narrative to argue against. Why? Because you know its foolish. Otherwise you could just address what is actually said.

 

These are not the actions of a person with sound logic, or even a sound argument. 

 

You also have no evidence that its the way to beat the Tampa Bay Bucs. 

 

You have no evidence we have won a game with this philosophy.

 

Youre just talking out of your backside and being a condescending know it all while you do it.

 

But you at a gun fight with a dull spoon bruh.

 

You make this ridiculous statement that we needed to be aggressive, but aggressive doesnt mean you throw it over and over. And we already had a lead and actually blew it playing this style of football you are so fond of. We didnt get the lead throwing it every play. Again, thats not sound logic.

 

We attained the lead playing much more balanced football. The pass is simply more effective when you run the ball as well and make the defense defend both threats. We needed to remind them Taylor was still a threat to them every once in awhile. But instead we took him out of the plan. 

 

 

[hoosierhawk]

On 11/30/2021 at 9:13 AM, DougDew said:

 

 

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.

 

As Woody Hayes said, "Three things can happen when you throw the football and two of them are bad."

[EastStreet]

14 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

There is a reason that only 8 HCs out 32 call their own plays.

yup... 

but a lot of folks think all do lol... 

[ProblChld32]

3 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Actually since you are stating in facts, or, we would have been put in more obvious passing downs after they stuffed us.

 You can lament 24/7, but you post game critics will never be right. 
I would encourage you critics to refocus your lamentaion the second half of the week towards fixing Ebs defense.  

Do the passing downs even matter? Frank is responsible for Carson throwing the ball 22 times straight. What point are you even trying to make here? Are you saying blame the defense? We’ve been blaming the defense, we can also blame Frank as well because his play-calling was blatantly poor. Even the commentators were baffled as to why it took so long to go back to running the ball. 

[Colt.45]

35 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

Keep talking smack. You aint bothering me with your crying accusations, its complete nonsense. You can try to make it personal but it just makes you look bad. Nothing you are saying is true at all. Sorry you feel that way. I guess you are one of those RTDB guys. Nothing personal, i do enjoy your takes.

 

You keep wanting to change the scenario to favor you. How? Give me an example.

 

They called a ton of passes passes in a row. Thats the facts. Yes no one is debating that. What i'm doing is adding context. We're adults not infants, by now i assume we all know life isnt black or white. Football certainly isnt'

 

You've tried labeling some of those plays RPOs, which arent run plays. Because you know its foolish. They're not run plays but could easily have been depending on what the defense showed. Foolishness would be calling run plays for no reason just to keep the defense 'honest'. The defense that didnt give a hoot about honesty. We're the Indianapolis Colts not the Salvation Army Fillies, why in the world would we donate downs? You conveniently ignore the first half and how we started the game.

 

Now youre trying to remove half of them. Why? Because you know its foolish Again, context. I removed the first half passes because it was a 2min offense unless you're saying you wished we'd have run and run there too. I removed half the 2nd half consecutive passes because they were RPOs and could easily have been runs if they defense showed the right fronts. I didnt even mention the fact that almost half those second half attempts went to the RBs! NVM the conventional 'wisdom' that screens and dump offs are essentially extended run attempts....you know the kind of conventional stuff Collingsworth and Venturi and guys like that spout.

 

You also are constantly putting words into other peoples mouths to create a favorable narrative to argue against. Why? Because you know its foolish. Otherwise you could just address what is actually said. Well what exactly is it i put in your mouth? And what exactly is it you're saying? All i'm seeing is a bunch of folks mad that the coach did something and lost the game so whatever he did was invalidated automatically. Basically, insane thinking.

 

These are not the actions of a person with sound logic, or even a sound argument. Yes, and the thought that you run into stacked boxes is absolutely sound. Defense shows a strategy built on stopping the run, defense has shown that they can keep you shut, yet you suggest that the sound thing to do would have been to run anyway because.....balance? Yeah sounds sound.

 

You also have no evidence that its the way to beat the Tampa Bay Bucs. And your evidence is where exactly?

 

You have no evidence we have won a game with this philosophy. We had one drive that bogged down passing. One. We lit that defense up.

 

Youre just talking out of your backside and being a condescending know it all while you do it. All this is immaterial hyperemotional stuff that has nothing to do with the debate.

 

But you at a gun fight with a dull spoon bruh. I might be John Wick though, in which case your guns are utterly useless.  

 

You make this ridiculous statement that we needed to be aggressive, but aggressive doesnt mean you throw it over and over. And we already had a lead and actually blew it playing this style of football you are so fond of. We didnt get the lead throwing it every play. Again, thats not sound logic. Being aggressive doesnt mean throwing it every play, indeed you're right. It means going for the play that gives you the chance of the most yards. It means not playing ball control, it can mean a world of things that are not tactical, it's a strategic mentality not tactical. You're confusing the two.

 

We attained the lead playing much more balanced football. The pass is simply more effective when you run the ball as well and make the defense defend both threats. We needed to remind them Taylor was still a threat to them every once in awhile. But instead we took him out of the plan. And this is sound logic? We started the game playing one way, so we should have played that way all day? We attained the lead playing one way so we should have ignored the opponent's actions and kept at it? We attained the lead playing one way, okay i grant you that. However, we accelerated and extended the lead doing something else? Is that not fact? JT was always in the plan, never went away from him. He's a pass catching back isnt he? 

 

 

Responses bolded. 

[Colt.45]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

Yup. I don't think people understand that both HC (general) and play calling are big time responsibilities. It's hard to do both at a high level. I'm sure Frank get's help with HC part given he has to spend a ton of time game planning and play calling, but it's two big jobs on one guy. I love what he brings as a guy, and just wish he would focus on the bigger things. Let someone else put 100% focus on play calling. No shame in that. 

I have nothing against Frank Reich giving up play calling but what're the reasons for calling for that? Do we have some solid logical ones or are we feeling a bit emotional about being 6-6 and not thinking clearly? I dont know the answer but I frame it this way because typically when a HC is 'coerced' into giving up play calling, it's typically because his team stinks or his offense isnt doing anything and clearly needs fresh ideas. When Andy Reid has been asked to give it up, it's usually after the Chiefs have a couple 'rough' weeks. Bruce Arians famously said in 2017 that if he had to do that then he wouldn't want to coach (that was when the Cards had some rough times)....then health issues came up again and he made some adjustments in life priorities at his next stop. 

So far the Colts are not struggling on the side of the ball the HC is in charge of, not even close to struggling so i'm not sure what the improvement would be if he gave it to Marcus Brady. What do you think we gain?

[Goatface Killah]

19 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

Responses bolded. 

Adding things that didnt actually happen is not context. 

 

And no being aggressive is not going for the play that gets the most yards, if it was why would you ever run it?

[throwing BBZ]

On 11/28/2021 at 6:27 PM, Nesjan3 said:

Its futile people dont understand lol

 

 No, we really don't care about Wentz's decision to pass on that many passes in a row. Our offense staff analyzed Tampa Bay the best they know how, devised a game plan to attack them, and prepared their players to play.
 Bowles is an EXCELLENT DC. Vea and Suh dominated us. He has two Superior LB's, and a very good safety. How about that 5' 9 1/2" Safety getting the int. 1 on 1 against our stout 6'4" WR 40 yards downfield? I'D BET he wouldn't do it again the next 20 times. Yes he did it with a slight PI, and they called a Bogus critical PI on Rock. ALL parts of the real reasons why we lost,

 SORRY our defense is so bad, sorry Hines and Pascal got us beat.

 Why keep blathering on about how you would do it? It's over and done.

 LMAO that someone thinks this defense, and our modest receiving core is quality enough for a deep run.

 How do you debate with that thought process? It is Futile, some will never believe my/your viewpont. 

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, Colt.45 said:

I have nothing against Frank Reich giving up play calling but what're the reasons for calling for that? Do we have some solid logical ones or are we feeling a bit emotional about being 6-6 and not thinking clearly? I dont know the answer but I frame it this way because typically when a HC is 'coerced' into giving up play calling, it's typically because his team stinks or his offense isnt doing anything and clearly needs fresh ideas. When Andy Reid has been asked to give it up, it's usually after the Chiefs have a couple 'rough' weeks. Bruce Arians famously said in 2017 that if he had to do that then he wouldn't want to coach (that was when the Cards had some rough times)....then health issues came up again and he made some adjustments in life priorities at his next stop. 

So far the Colts are not struggling on the side of the ball the HC is in charge of, not even close to struggling so i'm not sure what the improvement would be if he gave it to Marcus Brady. What do you think we gain?

 

I've been pretty specific the last couple years. We've had clear head scratcher game plans / game prep, and clear head sratchers in play calling. I could write a very long list. Frankly though (pardon the pun), there's plenty out there, and I don't feel like putting the effort into listing it all yet again. Folks that are Reich defenders just dismiss it with subjective drivel, and the folks that have paid attention and have been critical, already know. 

 

So in short, if your happy with Frank, great. If you're genuinely interested in why folks are critical, and won't dismiss facts, trends, logic, with replies like "stats don't matter", and "Frank knows best", then let me know and perhaps I'll put a list together again lol.. 

 

[Colt.45]

Just now, GoatBeard said:

Adding things that didnt actually happen is not context. 

 

What didn't happen?

Context is everything. We went pass heavy to end the 1st half. That pass break started during our two min drive....we started with UNDER 2 minutes left and gave TB the ball with 18 seconds left, Tom Brady knelt to finish the half. You have issue with that or no? Any lies detected so far? That's 26 minus the 12 or so passes it took which leaves us with 14 (i may be wrong and it's 15). Where's the lie?

 

We started the second half pass heavy. Sliced and diced them as we had done to finish the first half, ready to go up by likely 7 more or maybe 3 but more likely 7. Fisher blows his assignment, Glowinski blows his assignment, we fumble the ball. Now here's where folks are mad....this is the moment of truth. You're essentially saying that we should have been running here even though the defense was dead set against it. My assumption is that you feel if we ran, we wouldn't have fumbled, and then had an INT on the next drive? Of course, that's merely feelings talking. JT could have fumbled, Hines could have fumbled. 

 

Half this 2nd half pass attempts went to the RBs so they were not isolated from the game. 

 

so tell me, what part of it all was a lie or wrong context?

[Colt.45]

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

I've been pretty specific the last couple years. We've had clear head scratcher game plans / game prep, and clear head sratchers in play calling. I could write a very long list. Frankly though (pardon the pun), there's plenty out there, and I don't feel like putting the effort into listing it all yet again. Folks that are Reich defenders just dismiss it with subjective drivel, and the folks that have paid attention and have been critical, already know. 

 

So in short, if your happy with Frank, great. If you're genuinely interested in why folks are critical, and won't dismiss facts, trends, logic, with replies like "stats don't matter", and "Frank knows best", then let me know and perhaps I'll put a list together again lol.. 

 

East, i disagree with some of your fundamental approach/beliefs but i always make it a point to read your stuff because i find it to be enlightening. When i asked for specifics, i wasn't being glib. This season we're 6-6, and over the last 9 weeks, i think Frank's gameplans have been stellar. With the exception of the Jags game, we have marched up and down the field against every defense we faced. Now, the defensive gameplanning might be another issue entirely. So unless you're saying Frank would have more time to focus on that side of the ball, i'm not really seeing it hence the questions from my end. If you can attach a list of one of your threads from the past, i'd be glad for the refresher.

 

I'm open minded but i will add that i've seen all 32 coaches make errors. I've seen all 32 coaches have their fanbases call for their heads, or for them to give up play calling. I've seen all 32 fanbases worry about game planning when losses start coming in, the more losses, the louder the call. 

 

Look, i know that Reich isnt perfect but no coach is. So if he gave up play calls, and then the offense became a top 20 O rather than a top 10/top 8 offense, what's the gain? If he gives up the calls, what exactly do we gain from that? Do we show more focus as a team? i.e. quit giving up double digit leads? Does the defense tighten up? What are the gains?

[Four2itus]

1 minute ago, Colt.45 said:

I'm open minded but i will add that i've seen all 32 coaches make errors. I've seen all 32 coaches have their fanbases call for their heads, or for them to give up play calling. I've seen all 32 fanbases worry about game planning when losses start coming in, the more losses, the louder the call.

Yep. Fans should read the Bills boards after we dismantled them. Playcalling, soft, blah,. blah, blah, blah, blah. It's the new NFL fan style........................lose, and I will use stats to show why I am smarter than NFL level coaches and players. It's * hilarious!

[chad72]

Still waiting on the Fire Eberflus...threads to show up like the Fire Ron Meeks threads I remember, LOL.  

 

Or maybe the dust has settled for me, I see the forest for the trees and see how no matter how well a coach can call plays, the players can still muck it up. On to the Texans!!! 

[Goatface Killah]

8 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

 

What didn't happen?

Context is everything. We went pass heavy to end the 1st half. That pass break started during our two min drive....we started with UNDER 2 minutes left and gave TB the ball with 18 seconds left, Tom Brady knelt to finish the half. You have issue with that or no? Any lies detected so far? That's 26 minus the 12 or so passes it took which leaves us with 14 (i may be wrong and it's 15). Where's the lie?

 

We started the second half pass heavy. Sliced and diced them as we had done to finish the first half, ready to go up by likely 7 more or maybe 3 but more likely 7. Fisher blows his assignment, Glowinski blows his assignment, we fumble the ball. Now here's where folks are mad....this is the moment of truth. You're essentially saying that we should have been running here even though the defense was dead set against it. My assumption is that you feel if we ran, we wouldn't have fumbled, and then had an INT on the next drive? Of course, that's merely feelings talking. JT could have fumbled, Hines could have fumbled. 

 

Half this 2nd half pass attempts went to the RBs so they were not isolated from the game. 

 

so tell me, what part of it all was a lie or wrong context?

Because they threw it 26 or 27 times in a row. It doesnt matter if it worked. And it doesnt matter if they "tried" to gove him some carries, BECAUSE THEY DIDNT. And it doesnt matter if you think it was a good strategy BECAUSE IT DID NOT WORK!

 

Youre explanations/excuses never actually happened and are irrelevant. The RPOs were in fact pass plays. The halftime break doesnt change the fact that JT didnt get a carry for like 26 minutes of gameplay, which is almost half the game.

 

Jesus man if I decide to throw a pass directly to a defender and he allows it to hit him in the face and it bounces to one of my guys was it a great idea? 

 

That TD pass to TY Hilton had a margin of error of merely centimeters. We got it. It was a fantastic play. But if that pass isnt exactly where it was at, we turn it over on downs and dont even get that 7.

 

Do you know how many things had to go right for that play to work?

 

We didnt march it right down the field and punch it in easy at all.

 

And you dont see why passing is so much riskier than just running?

 

Do you know what has to happen for JT to take it to the house? He needs a lane.

 

Thats it.

 

My god man isnt the defense always dead set against you running? Thats kind of their job right? The problem is it usually isnt that easy. You have to tackle a great, great player sometimes, like. Henry or a Taylor or a Kamara. And thats the tough part. 

 

You said it in your post, you are making assumptions about how I feel, and thats your problem.

 

I feel that we need to give the ball to Taylor because he is our best player. Its almost that simple.

 

I also dont think any other team can stop him for long. Sure they might have some success clogging up running lanes, but they arent gonna be able to do it all game long.

 

And regardless of that, if they make one mistake, he is GONE. You put 8 in the box that only leaves 3 behind them. If he gets thru, GOOD LUCK.

 

Johnathan Taylor is the reson we are #4 in scoring offense. He has about 40% of our TDs directly. And he is probably responsible for several others indirectly. Like the ones we scored in that game you say is only because they were selling out to stop HIM. So you keep them worried about him by GIVING HIM THE BALL. Its not hard. Every play doesnt have to be a homerun. 

[Colt.45]

3 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

Yep. Fans should read the Bills boards after we dismantled them. Playcalling, soft, blah,. blah, blah, blah, blah. It's the new NFL fan style........................lose, and I will use stats to show why I am smarter than NFL level coaches and players. It's * hilarious!

 

Remember that 4th and 2 from that 35 - 34 colts/pats classic? Folks wanted Belichick to take his Aa55 home after that. All the talk was of how arrogant he was and this that and the other. The media put him in a blender, the fans were 'sick of his *', basically insane stuff. You'd have been forgiven for thinking the HoF coach made his decision with complete leave of his senses, heck you'd have thought he was some high school or peewee coach who stumbled onto an NFL field, folks were talking as if he was nothing. Amazing stuff. Fans tend to forget that coaches think with context layered on, GMs think with context layered on.

 

I don't think Frank Reich is infallible, the man makes mistakes and admits them and honestly there're times when i think it's about time he started learning from his mistakes instead of saying mea culpa each time but again 31 other coaches are subject to the same problems more or less. When his time comes, he'll move on but i think Indy's got a good one. We lost a top 5 QB and have not collapsed into mediocrity....that's a HARD thing to do in the NFL

[coltsblue1844]

On 11/30/2021 at 1:52 AM, GoatBeard said:

So listen all Colts future opponents.....all you have to do is put 5 guys on the LOS with their hand in the dirt and neutralize our best player. 

 

Look, you all are defending the coach calling 27 pass plays in a row. It was absolutely moronic. Period. It didnt work at all. And Ive said all Im gonna say about it.

 

 

There is a difference between 5 D linemen from any team... or the defending champs with Vea in the middle.  

[Colt.45]

2 minutes ago, GoatBeard said:

Because they threw it 26 or 27 times in a row. It doesnt matter if it worked. And it doesnt matter if they "tried" to gove him some carries, BECAUSE THEY DIDNT. And it doesnt matter if you think it was a good strategy BECAUSE IT DID NOT WORK! And this is sound logic to you? It didn't work so don't ever do it? Seriously?  So if JT and/or Hines fumble the ball in a run-heavy gameplan then that means the plan failed? Not sure how the math works with that honestly. 

 

Youre explanations/excuses never actually happened and are irrelevant. The RPOs were in fact pass plays. The halftime break doesnt change the fact that JT didnt get a carry for like 26 minutes of gameplay, which is almost half the game. So we should have run the ball during the 2min drill. Got it. Those 18 seconds we left Brady with would never have happened if we tried that, and we'd have gone to half up 3. 

 

Jesus man if I decide to throw a pass directly to a defender and he allows it to hit him in the face and it bounces to one of my guys was it a great idea? The idea may have been great, the execution may have been terrible. There's a big difference between strategy and tactics, you are most certainly conflating them.

 

That TD pass to TY Hilton had a margin of error of merely centimeters. We got it. It was a fantastic play. But if that pass isnt exactly where it was at, we turn it over on downs and dont even get that 7. If my aunt gets some sacks, she'll be my uncle. What's the point here? You're mad about that play? If you intend to play the what-if game on every pass then we can really get this party started. All those passes our DBs dropped v Brady? If Darius ate more wheaties, his fingers might be longer and he'd have tipped that pass instead of giving up the big play to Gronk. 

 

Do you know how many things had to go right for that play to work? Again, i am not seeing the point. Are you saying that the run is better than the pass because more things can go wrong when you pass? Is that the point?

 

We didnt march it right down the field and punch it in easy at all. 14 plays, a sack, two 3rd down conversions. Fine it wasn't easy, i agree but it got done. Running would definitely have been conceding the game and waiting for HT.

 

And you dont see why passing is so much riskier than just running? Ah, so you do think running is less risky. Forget about my earlier question then. I don't agree. I think there's a time for each, and i think the context should determine the choice.

 

Do you know what has to happen for JT to take it to the house? He needs a lane. Some teams will give that more easily than others. 

 

Thats it. The defense know it too you know...

 

My god man isnt the defense always dead set against you running? Thats kind of their job right? The problem is it usually isnt that easy. You have to tackle a great, great player sometimes, like. Henry or a Taylor or a Kamara. And thats the tough part.  In this league, if a defense says you're not going to run the ball, put money on it, you shall not run the ball. Of course, that almost never is the case because if a defense stacks up like that, you beat them through the air and they back out of that real quick.

 

You said it in your post, you are making assumptions about how I feel, and thats your problem. I used the wrong phrase. I should have said know rather than assumption because you've been pretty clear. I was certainly right in my assumption. You do feel running would have been less risky.

 

I feel that we need to give the ball to Taylor because he is our best player. Its almost that simple. There were games in the Manning years when we ran the ball and Peyton was a game manager. Sometimes you have to do that. JT is our best player but if we cannot pass when teams dare us to, we will not win another game this season. That's the truth. JT has worked on his pass blocking and catching because he understands how important it is. We did try to get him the ball, we just did it through the air so this whole "jt is our best player and we need to give him the ball' train really isnt leaving the station.

 

I also dont think any other team can stop him for long. Sure they might have some success clogging up running lanes, but they arent gonna be able to do it all game long. Only if we can pass. If you cant pass successfully, JT isnt going anywhere, not even if he turns into the Incredible Hulk.

 

And regardless of that, if they make one mistake, he is GONE. You put 8 in the box that only leaves 3 behind them. If he gets thru, GOOD LUCK. Sure, and if the defense makes one mistake, they get beat by the mighty Ashton Dulin.

 

Johnathan Taylor is the reson we are #4 in scoring offense. He has about 40% of our TDs directly. And he is probably responsible for several others indirectly. Like the ones we scored in that game you say is only because they were selling out to stop HIM. So you keep them worried about him by GIVING HIM THE BALL. Its not hard. Every play doesnt have to be a homerun. Now we are getting some Goatbeard! Not every play has to be a home run, you are nailed on correct. However, look at the context please. We started the game and got 3 points from our 1st three drives. We didn't get anywhere running because....well, we didnt, JT was pegged down. Now why am i harping about context? Well, when your defense is shaping up to give up 38 points, and your defense has blown lead after lead, then it becomes important that you get the most out of every drive, and that means if JT isnt doing it, you move onto your lesser weapons, to me that seems pretty obvious. Doesnt matter that JT is your offense and responsible for everything, you still have to be able to be about more than him or you are....a bad offense. 

 

[coltsblue1844]

5 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Taylors 16 TDs probably has something to do with that.

well nearly 1/3 of those came in one game...sooo...   I think Taylor is the best RB in the league...but i also think Frank and Wentz are both way better than they're getting credit for

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

5 minutes ago, coltsblue1844 said:

There is a difference between 5 D linemen from any team... or the defending champs with Vea in the middle.  

This is a important point. Not every team has the players to pull it off and have success with it.

[John Waylon]

3 hours ago, Colt.45 said:

 

Ah sounds familiar. Where have i heard that sentiment expressed in the past?

Hmmmmm....which one to choose? I'll go with Bill Belichick after his 4th and 2 against the boys in blue. Yes. Even the greatest coach of all time had fans and the media accusing him of acting smarter than he is.

I sense a trend....anytime a coach does something unconventional by the standards of the day, he's called all sorts of names. And if that thing doesnt work? Oh boy, forget strategy, process, logic, forget anything. That coach faces a virtual stampede from fans and the media who definitely, definitely know better. 

Oh, the 4th and 2 game, you say? Good news! I was there. Section 445. 
 

The Patriots did not pass the ball 20 consecutive times in that 2nd half. They did not abandon the run despite leading. 
 

They absolutely did not. 
 

But hey, don’t take my word for it. Luckily there’s a record of what happened. A play by play record. 
 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/291115011

 

You’re either woefully misremembering what happened, or just flat out lying. After watching you flail wildly throughout this thread to defend your position I think I know which it is, but that’s just me. Everyone else can come to their own conclusions. 
 

Either way let’s go ahead and break it down. 

The Patriots passed 25 times in the second half. They ran 16 times. That’s right at a 60/40 split. Maybe you’re a little fuzzy on the concept of “abandoning the run”, but this does not qualify. Not even close, actually. 
 

Moving on, though…
 

It seems they also did not pass the ball 20 consecutive times in this second half. In fact, the most consecutive passes was 4. And the 4th consecutive pass came on the final play of the game where the Patriots were down by 1 with less than 10 seconds to go and in need of a miracle and they had no choice but to pass. The most consecutive passes in the second half other than that was 3, which only happened on 3 of their 7 drives. 
 

But I’m a nice guy, so you can go ahead and claim the 4 consecutive passes for your argument.
 

You turned up 20% of what you needed. 
 

Congratulations, I guess. Maybe this is an improvement from the norm, how am I to know?
 

But it does make me wonder why you have brought this game up at all, honestly. It very clearly doesn’t meet the criteria I’ve asked you for repeatedly here today. 
 

In fact, beyond the halftime lead and both Belichick and frank being in the building that night there’s no other parallels between these two games. At all. There are, however, some contrasts. 
 

They led by 10 at the half. 
We led by 10 at the half. 
 

They had Lawrence Maroney. 
We have Jonathan Taylor. 
 

They had an offensive line that night that was not near as good as ours is today. 
We have a QB today who is not near as good as theirs was that night. 
 

And yet they took that 10 point halftime lead and still ran the ball. They didn’t drop the whole game into Brady’s lap and let him go out against that pass rush for the second half and play hero ball. They didn’t * away that 10 point lead in 2 possessions the 3rd quarter. It took Peyton Manning playing one of the best halves in his career to take the lead from them, and it didn’t happen until there was under 30 seconds to go.  
 

Maybe you’re trying to point at Belichick’s crucial decision on the 4th down and trying to draw the connection to frank being “aggressive”. 
 

I may be wrong here, and correct me if I am, please, by all means, but golly gee Wally, I don’t think that was the first time in the history of the NFL that a coach has made an aggressive call on a crucial single play late in the game to try and win it. Probably not the 2nd, either. 
 

But hey, make no mistake about it, Belichick knew that converting that 4th down was the only chance that they had to win. Peyton had taken over and was smacking his defense around. When the pass to Welker went incomplete on 3rd down the whole building came alive because we knew we were about to see Peyton drive down and put up 7. It didn’t take a master of the game to see the direction that one was trending. Then when the Pats offense trotted back out for 4th down a wave of anxiety swept over the 60,000+ in the seats because we knew THAT play was the one that was going to determine the ending of that game. 
 

So what did Bill do?

 

This is important, so pay attention. 
 

He put the ball in the hands of his best player. He knew his best player wasn’t his RB. He knew his best player wasn’t on his defense. He made a one play decision to live or die with his best player and even though it didn’t work out for him it was 100% the right decision in that situation. 
 

There is literally no comparison between putting the ball in the hands of your best player on a 4th and 2 to win a game and making your best player a complete non-factor for most of a 2nd half where you should be using them to try and close out a big win. 
 

So that’s one game where a team didn’t throw it 20+ consecutive times in a 2nd half with a 10 point lead down. 
 

Next?

[Goatface Killah]

13 minutes ago, coltsblue1844 said:

There is a difference between 5 D linemen from any team... or the defending champs with Vea in the middle.  

And we have a great run blocking OL who couldve also brought Matt Pryor or Danny Pinter in the game to help neutralize that.

 

You act like the only potential adjustment is "hey lets throw deep"

 

And again, 5 on the LOS just means theres only 6 off the LOS....if he gets thru, good luck. 

[Colt.45]

Just now, John Waylon said:

Oh, the 4th and 2 game, you say? Good news! I was there. Section 445. 
 

The Patriots did not pass the ball 20 consecutive times in that 2nd half. They did not abandon the run despite leading. 
 

They absolutely did not. 
 

But hey, don’t take my word for it. Luckily there’s a record of what happened. A play by play record. 
 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay/_/gameId/291115011

 

You’re either woefully misremembering what happened, or just flat out lying. After watching you flail wildly throughout this thread to defend your position I think I know which it is, but that’s just me. Everyone else can come to their own conclusions. 
 

Either way let’s go ahead and break it down. 

The Patriots passed 25 times in the second half. They ran 16 times. That’s right at a 60/40 split. Maybe you’re a little fuzzy on the concept of “abandoning the run”, but this does not qualify. Not even close, actually. 
 

Moving on, though…
 

It seems they also did not pass the ball 20 consecutive times in this second half. In fact, the most consecutive passes was 4. And the 4th consecutive pass came on the final play of the game where the Patriots were down by 1 with less than 10 seconds to go and in need of a miracle and they had no choice but to pass. The most consecutive passes in the second half other than that was 3, which only happened on 3 of their 7 drives. 
 

But I’m a nice guy, so you can go ahead and claim the 4 consecutive passes for your argument.
 

You turned up 20% of what you needed. 
 

Congratulations, I guess. Maybe this is an improvement from the norm, how am I to know?
 

But it does make me wonder why you have brought this game up at all, honestly. It very clearly doesn’t meet the criteria I’ve asked you for repeatedly here today. 
 

In fact, beyond the halftime lead and both Belichick and frank being in the building that night there’s no other parallels between these two games. At all. There are, however, some contrasts. 
 

They led by 10 at the half. 
We led by 10 at the half. 
 

They had Lawrence Maroney. 
We have Jonathan Taylor. 
 

They had an offensive line that night that was not near as good as ours is today. 
We have a QB today who is not near as good as theirs was that night. 
 

And yet they took that 10 point halftime lead and still ran the ball. They didn’t drop the whole game into Brady’s lap and let him go out against that pass rush for the second half and play hero ball. They didn’t * away that 10 point lead in 2 possessions the 3rd quarter. It took Peyton Manning playing one of the best halves in his career to take the lead from them, and it didn’t happen until there was under 30 seconds to go.  
 

Maybe you’re trying to point at Belichick’s crucial decision on the 4th down and trying to draw the connection to frank being “aggressive”. 
 

I may be wrong here, and correct me if I am, please, by all means, but golly gee Wally, I don’t think that was the first time in the history of the NFL that a coach has made an aggressive call on a crucial single play late in the game to try and win it. Probably not the 2nd, either. 
 

But hey, make no mistake about it, Belichick knew that converting that 4th down was the only chance that they had to win. Peyton had taken over and was smacking his defense around. When the pass to Welker went incomplete on 3rd down the whole building came alive because we knew we were about to see Peyton drive down and put up 7. It didn’t take a master of the game to see the direction that one was trending. Then when the Pats offense trotted back out for 4th down a wave of anxiety swept over the 60,000+ in the seats because we knew THAT play was the one that was going to determine the ending of that game. 
 

So what did Bill do?

 

This is important, so pay attention. 
 

He put the ball in the hands of his best player. He knew his best player wasn’t his RB. He knew his best player wasn’t on his defense. He made a one play decision to live or die with his best player and even though it didn’t work out for him it was 100% the right decision in that situation. 
 

There is literally no comparison between putting the ball in the hands of your best player on a 4th and 2 to win a game and making your best player a complete non-factor for most of a 2nd half where you should be using them to try and close out a big win. 
 

So that’s one game where a team didn’t throw it 20+ consecutive times in a 2nd half with a 10 point lead down. 
 

Next?

Reread my statement. I never said said the 4th and 2 game was the game were the greatest coach of all time went full Air Coryell. I'm not giving you the answers, you can dig them out yourself. I gave you a couple clues. That's a lot of words in response to something you misunderstood.

 

I brought up 4th and 2 in response to your statement about Sean McVay! You pretty much dismissed him as serious, just like you've done with Reich. That's why i brought up 4th and 2. Reread, keep searching, those games happened.

 

 

[Goatface Killah]

14 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

 

Jesus dude where did I say run it on a 2 minute drill? 

 

"Are you saying the run is better than the pass?"

 

Did I say that? 

 

I cant even have a convo with you because you are just all over the place. I dont feel like explaining things I never said. Every single response from you has a bunch of made up nonsense in it.

 

Youre just being obtuse man, Im done with this stuff.