Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

My honest assessment of the 2021 colts


CR91
 Share

Recommended Posts

The colts are 6-6 which really is not bad considering we started 1-4 when everyone was calling for Reich to be fired and Wentz to be benched for Sam Ehlinger (as @jskinnz would say "oh dear god") Now I'm not gonna sit here and say the colts are Superbowl contenders because their not, but their not a bad built football team. Sure I'd love our pass rush to be more consistent and Leonard not be on one leg, but you take that into consideration and we were marching into a potential 17 point lead on the defending world champions before the bottom just fell out. Also let's not act like Brady beat us because that is the farthest from the truth. Outside of the final drive, Brady was pretty pedestrian. I would even argue Wentz outplayed Brady. You wanna fault Wentz for the fumble or INT on the ball to Pittman be my guess, but you saw money throws especially on third down and escape ability once again. This team can win and hopefully we'll beat the Texans and go into the bye 7-6 with a big game vs the Patriots on the horizon.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Btown_Colt said:

Wentz wasn’t the main problem, Frank was. I’ll give you that!

 

Yes and no. RPOs are basically run plays, but Wentz read the defense and decided the pass was the better option. Also I personally consider screens run plays and we ran a lot of screens. Should Taylor have got the ball more? No question, but it wasn't like Taylor wasn't getting the ball thrown to him. We were taking what the defense was giving us and for the most part the offense was very successful.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Yes and no. RPOs are basically run plays, but Wentz read the defense and decided the pass was the better option. Also I personally consider screens run plays and we ran a lot of screens. Should Taylor have got the ball more? No question, but it wasn't like Taylor wasn't getting the ball thrown to him. We were taking what the defense was giving us and for the most part the offense was very successful.

Why is the forum stuck on RPO all of the sudden? Because he called 5 of them

in the 3rd quarter? Did anyone ever suggest Wentz didn’t make the right reads on those plays? You know there were other play calls, right? 
 

Outside of the 1st and 3rd quarters the offense was successful, agreed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Btown_Colt said:

Why is the forum stuck on RPO all of the sudden? Because he called 5 of them

in the 3rd quarter? Did anyone ever suggest Wentz didn’t make the right reads on those plays? You know there were other play calls, right? 
 

Outside of the 1st and 3rd quarters the offense was successful, agreed. 

 

No offense is gonna click for 60 mins, but 31 points is pretty successful.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CR91 said:

 

No offense is gonna click for 60 mins, but 31 points is pretty successful.

You don’t win by scoring a lot of points. You win by scoring more than your opponents. We could’ve scored more against the Bucs, but turnovers and coaching stopped ud from doing that. The defense is just trash. Outside of turnovers we’re just a terrible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Btown_Colt said:

Why is the forum stuck on RPO all of the sudden? Because he called 5 of them

in the 3rd quarter? Did anyone ever suggest Wentz didn’t make the right reads on those plays? You know there were other play calls, right? 
 

Outside of the 1st and 3rd quarters the offense was successful, agreed. 

 

some people are getting stuck on the wrong things to avoid having to admit that Reich was a big part of the TB loss.  for all the bashing of the defense, they played very well in the first half, limiting Brady and the bucs to 14 points.  it wasn't until the offense and special teams started turning the ball over that they started giving up points in bunches.  And the last drive of the game was very disappointing, but how many defenses has tom brady done that too?  not to mention, unlike reich, arians and brady kept sprinkling in the run to further wear down the colts defense, that was already getting gassed from having to defend short fields and extra TB possessions after Colt turnovers.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

You don’t win by scoring a lot of points. You win by scoring more than your opponents. We could’ve scored more against the Bucs, but turnovers and coaching stopped ud from doing that. The defense is just trash. Outside of turnovers we’re just a terrible. 

 

Defense isn't losing us games. Shutting teams out isn't something defenses do. They make periodic stops to give tour offense the chance to score. 4 turnovers lost this game. 4 drives that could have been points. 4 chances at the endzpme squandered. 

 

This loss is on the offense. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Thunderbolt said:

Defense win games, we can score, but Flus need to get his act together and do more blitzes and pressure the QB like crazy,

 

I don't love our defensive scheme, but any defense is going to get gassed when the offense and special teams keep giving up turnovers giving the opposing offense extra possessions and short fields.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Solid84 said:

You don’t win by scoring a lot of points. You win by scoring more than your opponents. We could’ve scored more against the Bucs, but turnovers and coaching stopped ud from doing that. The defense is just trash. Outside of turnovers we’re just a terrible. 

 

I was referring to how well the offense played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

Defense isn't losing us games. Shutting teams out isn't something defenses do. They make periodic stops to give tour offense the chance to score. 4 turnovers lost this game. 4 drives that could have been points. 4 chances at the endzpme squandered. 

 

This loss is on the offense. 

All year long, anytime a good team playing us needs a first down, the TE across the middle has been open.  Every loss has shown that. Baltimore, Tennessee, and Tampa exploited that. It’s beyond my knowledge how to fix that, but it’s obvious it’s always open.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Solid84 said:

You don’t win by scoring a lot of points. You win by scoring more than your opponents. We could’ve scored more against the Bucs, but turnovers and coaching stopped ud from doing that. The defense is just trash. Outside of turnovers we’re just a terrible. 

Our offense was largely successful once we made adjustments to beat them with the pass, then later in the game with the run (which was only successful because we had beaten them so badly with the pass that they had to respect it). Rarely can coaching overcome 4 turnovers in a game with a great opponent like TB.

 

This is spot on:

13 hours ago, J@son said:

I don't love our defensive scheme, but any defense is going to get gassed when the offense and special teams keep giving up turnovers giving the opposing offense extra possessions and short fields.

It blows my mind how broadly ignorant a lot of people on this forum are to this concept. People trash talk our defense, but fail to be able to recognize that no defense can play a drive, sit for a play or 2, then be back on the field for another drive due to a turnover or 3 & out, and be able to play at a high level. Our defense was exhausted from constantly being put right back onto the field after the turnovers.

 

Sure TB scored a few TDs and got back into the game, but turnovers, short fields due to those turnovers, and a gassed defense are why we lost. It's not because we didn't run it more, our defensive scheme is terrible, or because we have a bad coaching staff. Take away any one of those turnovers and we beat the defending champions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im optimistic about the future but I would be even more so if "the bottom falling out" thing you mentioned wasn't becoming a regular thing for this team under Frank. We could still make the playoffs and go on a run. Once playoffs hit anything can happen. 

9-7 Giants of 2012 are the most recent example.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

Yes and no. RPOs are basically run plays, but Wentz read the defense and decided the pass was the better option. Also I personally consider screens run plays and we ran a lot of screens. Should Taylor have got the ball more? No question, but it wasn't like Taylor wasn't getting the ball thrown to him. We were taking what the defense was giving us and for the most part the offense was very successful.

The best RB in the league only ran 16 times and a total of 20 touches. Shame on Frank

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jimmy g said:

All year long, anytime a good team playing us needs a first down, the TE across the middle has been open.  Every loss has shown that. Baltimore, Tennessee, and Tampa exploited that. It’s beyond my knowledge how to fix that, but it’s obvious it’s always open.

The coaches need to answer that question 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Btown_Colt said:

Wentz wasn’t the main problem, Frank was. I’ll give you that!

If you're referring to the Bucs game, and not the season as a whole, then Frank didn't fumble a punt inside the Colts' 20 yard line. And he didn't commit the other 4 turn-overs, or the 6 penalties the Colts had. It was the lack of execution by the players that cost the Colts the game, IMO.

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

Yes and no. RPOs are basically run plays, but Wentz read the defense and decided the pass was the better option. Also I personally consider screens run plays and we ran a lot of screens. Should Taylor have got the ball more? No question, but it wasn't like Taylor wasn't getting the ball thrown to him. We were taking what the defense was giving us and for the most part the offense was very successful.

Disagree. RPOs are exactly what the acronym says. It's a run pass option. The output is dictated what the D shows. 
And we're one of the heaviest RPO teams in the league. So Bowles knew exactly what we'd do given the looks he gave us. At some point you have to make an actual non RPO play call, or change the RPO options. Still scratching my head we didn't hit the edges with JT or Hines. They were open. 

 

And yes, the O had success, and we took what Bowles gave us. But it was what TB wanted. It turned into a pass happy shootout with the Goat. IMO, adjustments should have been made at half to hit the edges and try to be more creative in the run game, to chew some clock with the lead. I would have also started the game pass heavy, and then went to runs. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a decent team. However every aspect of the team (coaching, schemes, players, etc.) has had dissapointing moments throughout the year.

 

Their record really shows who they are, and the opponents they've lost to (and how they lost) and won against shows a lot, whether people like it or not.

 

 

I've said it before in another thread, I do wanna see how Frank does with a starting QB(the most important part of a team)that stays over a year. The team has tons of potential, but several things do need to change in the next year or two before I can see them as perennial contenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Shive said:

Our offense was largely successful once we made adjustments to beat them with the pass, then later in the game with the run (which was only successful because we had beaten them so badly with the pass that they had to respect it). Rarely can coaching overcome 4 turnovers in a game with a great opponent like TB.

My point was two horrible turnovers (Hines and Pascal) were definitely factors in our loss, but I am still amazed how people on this forum can keep defending passing for 26 consecutive plays. The defense will adjust and make a play. And they did. Two infact.

 

"But they were showing a stacked box!" which is what Todd Bowles does. He's excellent at hiding the actual defensive play. If showing a stacked box is all it takes for Reich and Wentz to make this offense one dimensional this is season is over because that is what we will face from now on.

We didn't adjust until there was 10 minutes left of the game - that's too little too late. Taylor has faced 8 man boxes before and been succesful, but Reich gave up on the run even though it started getting yards in the 2nd Q.

 

That said our defense sucks. People can make all the excuses they want but the only metric worth talking about regarding our defense is the turnovers. Everything else has us at average or below. Of course the turnovers didn't help, but acting like our defense was going to stop the Bucs with or without those turnovers is a bit ridiculous in my opinion.

 

You win by scoring more points than your opponents. The offense didn't help the defense at all, but the offense also left points on the field because of playcalling in my opinion.

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

39 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Disagree. RPOs are exactly what the acronym says. It's a run pass option. The output is dictated what the D shows. 
And we're one of the heaviest RPO teams in the league. So Bowles knew exactly what we'd do given the looks he gave us. At some point you have to make an actual non RPO play call, or change the RPO options. Still scratching my head we didn't hit the edges with JT or Hines. They were open. 

 

And yes, the O had success, and we took what Bowles gave us. But it was what TB wanted. It turned into a pass happy shootout with the Goat. IMO, adjustments should have been made at half to hit the edges and try to be more creative in the run game, to chew some clock with the lead. I would have also started the game pass heavy, and then went to runs. 

 

My point is the play itself is a designed run with the option to throw. Every RPO I've seen us play looks like their running.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

My point was two horrible turnovers (Hines and Pascal) were definitely factors in our loss, but I am still amazed how people on this forum can keep defending passing for 26 consecutive plays. The defense will adjust and make a play. And they did. Two infact.

Like Frank said, "passing was fine when it worked, but as soon as it didn't work, somehow it's suddenly a problem."

 

40 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

"But they were showing a stacked box!" which is what Todd Bowles does. He's excellent at hiding the actual defensive play. If showing a stacked box is all it takes for Reich and Wentz to make this offense one dimensional this is season is over because that is what we will face from now on.

We didn't adjust until there was 10 minutes left of the game - that's too little too late. Taylor has faced 8 man boxes before and been succesful, but Reich gave up on the run even though it started getting yards in the 2nd Q.

TB came in with the top rank run defense and made it a point to stop JT and force us to pass to win. They effectively shut down our running game, so we adjusted, started passing, and were extremely successful. It wasn't until they started bailing out of run looks to cover the pass that we started running the ball well. Should we have adjusted a bit earlier? Sure, but again, our success in running the ball late was only due to them having to respect our passing game after having so much success.

 

Bowles showing a stacked box is exactly where an RPO has a lot of value and why we utilized them. I'm not sure if most of this forum understands how they work, because based off of comments I've seen, I don't think they do (not saying you're one of these people, but you may be). With an RPO, you're not getting to the line, seeing a run look and just audibling to a pass.

 

An RPO is a run play with a pass option. The OL blocks like a run and the RB assumes they're getting the ball. You have players on the defense that are keys (typically a LB or S) and whether you pass or run is dictated by how that key reacts immediately after the snap. Generally, if they look like they're playing the run, you pass and vice versa. You're making the decision in that split moment whether to hand the ball off to the RB or pull it back and pass it.

 

Like Frank mentioned, the RPOs we called were largely successful and averaged 7 yards per play.

 

40 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

That said our defense sucks. People can make all the excuses they want but the only metric worth talking about regarding our defense is the turnovers. Everything else has us at average or below. Of course the turnovers didn't help, but acting like our defense was going to stop the Bucs with or without those turnovers is a bit ridiculous in my opinion.

 

You win by scoring more points than your opponents. The offense didn't help the defense at all, but the offense also left points on the field because of playcalling in my opinion.

It's not fantastic and I don't love our scheme or the soft zone we love to call, but they've been much more stout the past couple of games and only seem to struggle this season when the offense stalls or there's turnovers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

My point is the play itself is a designed run with the option to throw. Every RPO I've seen us play looks like their running.

It's the option to run or throw. Obviously the first "look" has to be run, due to logical progression. Other than a draw type play, you don't see many drop backs, then run lol. 

 

But it's not a "run play". It's an option play. And it turned out to be mostly a pass play last week, of course with the run fake prior to the pass. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

It's the option to run or throw. Obviously the first "look" has to be run, due to logical progression. Other than a draw type play, you don't see many drop backs, then run lol. 

 

But it's not a "run play". It's an option play. And it turned out to be mostly a pass play last week, of course with the run fake prior to the pass. 

Like I posted above, an RPO is designed as a run play with a pass option. The OL run blocks and the RB assumes they're getting the handoff. It's not until the QB reads the key defender that he can pull the ball back and turn the play into a pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Disagree. RPOs are exactly what the acronym says. It's a run pass option. The output is dictated what the D shows. 
And we're one of the heaviest RPO teams in the league. So Bowles knew exactly what we'd do given the looks he gave us. At some point you have to make an actual non RPO play call, or change the RPO options. Still scratching my head we didn't hit the edges with JT or Hines. They were open. 

 

And yes, the O had success, and we took what Bowles gave us. But it was what TB wanted. It turned into a pass happy shootout with the Goat. IMO, adjustments should have been made at half to hit the edges and try to be more creative in the run game, to chew some clock with the lead. I would have also started the game pass heavy, and then went to runs. 


“But it was what TB wanted”

 

Yup. My only post before the game was that if I were the Bucs I’d sell out against the run and let them pass as much as possible, hope for mistakes. Wentz is good, but the more you make him throw the more chances you’ll get for turnovers.

 

Like you said, Reich’s right in that he took what they gave him, but that played right into their hands. And like we talked about on game day, if we’d hit even one or two solid run plays to the outside, we would’ve had their defense right where we wanted them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Shive said:

Like I posted above, an RPO is designed as a run play with a pass option. The OL run blocks and the RB assumes they're getting the handoff. It's not until the QB reads the key defender that he can pull the ball back and turn the play into a pass.

It's blocked as a run play to sell the fake. It's designed as a pass play for the pass catchers. It's an option play plain and simple. 

In short, it's a play designed to create a conflict, and identify that conflict player or players, and exploit that conflict. The decisions are sometimes pre snap, sometimes post snap... 

 

There are 3-4 basic RPO types of decisions. A lot of decisions are called "leverage" based calls. If for instance the WR has depth and width leverage on a defender, then the call will be pass regardless of what happens post snap. Then you have "numbers" based RPO decisions which are pre-snap calls as well. When the box is loaded (like last week), the call is pass. The only post snap RPO decision is considered "movement" based RPOs. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:


“But it was what TB wanted”

 

Yup. My only post before the game was that if I were the Bucs I’d sell out against the run and let them pass as much as possible, hope for mistakes. Wentz is good, but the more you make him throw the more chances you’ll get for turnovers.

 

Sure, Reich’s right in that he took what they gave him…but that’s exactly what they wanted.

 

Bingo. Bowles knew exactly what Reich would chose, or our heavy RPO based O would do. Like I posted above, "numbers" RPO (1 of 3-4 basic RPO decisions) dictated what we did on all those snaps. 

 

And agreed, Wentz is good, but you just don't get into a shootout with the Goat. More mistakes generally happen in a pass happy shootout. And they did. Not shocked. We should have tried harder to be creative with the run, and force Bowles out of the rush blitz, instead of doing exactly what he wanted us to do. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Shive said:

Like Frank said, "passing was fine when it worked, but as soon as it didn't work, somehow it's suddenly a problem."

 

TB came in with the top rank run defense and made it a point to stop JT and force us to pass to win. They effectively shut down our running game, so we adjusted, started passing, and were extremely successful. It wasn't until they started bailing out of run looks to cover the pass that we started running the ball well. Should we have adjusted a bit earlier? Sure, but again, our success in running the ball late was only due to them having to respect our passing game after having so much success.

 

Bowles showing a stacked box is exactly where an RPO has a lot of value and why we utilized them. I'm not sure if most of this forum understands how they work, because based off of comments I've seen, I don't think they do (not saying you're one of these people, but you may be). With an RPO, you're not getting to the line, seeing a run look and just audibling to a pass.

 

An RPO is a run play with a pass option. The OL blocks like a run and the RB assumes they're getting the ball. You have players on the defense that are keys (typically a LB or S) and whether you pass or run is dictated by how that key reacts immediately after the snap. Generally, if they look like they're playing the run, you pass and vice versa. You're making the decision in that split moment whether to hand the ball off to the RB or pull it back and pass it.

 

Like Frank mentioned, the RPOs we called were largely successful and averaged 7 yards per play.

 

It's not fantastic and I don't love our scheme or the soft zone we love to call, but they've been much more stout the past couple of games and only seem to struggle this season when the offense stalls or there's turnovers.

Sigh. Throwing the ball 26 times in a row is bad playcalling and 7 ypa isn’t going to change that fact when it gave the Bucs 2 turnovers which they scored 14 points off. 
 

There are several other ways to run the ball than up the gut. Reich just doesn’t have the imagination to call those plays apparently. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Bingo. Bowles knew exactly what Reich would chose, or our heavy RPO based O would do. Like I posted above, "numbers" RPO (1 of 3-4 basic RPO decisions) dictated what we did on all those snaps. 

How do you know that all of our RPO's last game were this type and not the post-snap type? (legitimately asking)

 

26 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

We should have tried harder to be creative with the run

I don't disagree with this.

 

6 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

Sigh. Throwing the ball 26 times in a row is bad playcalling and 7 ypa isn’t going to change that fact when it gave the Bucs 2 turnovers which they scored 14 points off.

Passing the ball also got us 3 TD's. You can't be ok with the heavy pass when it's working for you, then immediately blame it the second one wrong thing happens. If that strip sack or INT don't happen and we pass our way to another TD, this conversation never happens. Fans love to view everything with the benefit of hindsight and playcalling doesn't have that benefit.

 

Just like when we would get a lead and primarily run the ball, but end up losing, we blame Reich for getting to conservative with playcalling. We get a lead and keep passing, but end up losing and somehow we abandoned the run. It's all just maddening stuff...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Passing that many times increases the pressure on the QB b/c they expect him to pass on every play obviously.  That strip sack on Wentz was his fault, should have step up in the pocket, he stayed too far back like a statue and didn't move up, one of the turning points in the game I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Shive said:

How do you know that all of our RPO's last game were this type and not the post-snap type? (legitimately asking)

 

Just to expand.... RPOs in general try to minimize grey areas for the QB. For instance on "movement" based RPOs, if a specific LB drops, or CB/S drops, pre-snap, it might trigger a run (or other action). If that same player moves in, it triggers a pass potentially. On a leverage based RPO, if someone for instance plays 10 yards off TY (depth leverage), it may trigger a pass like a 5 yard stop and turn or back shoulder. If all the CBs are at 5 yards or shorter (again depth), it may trigger a run (over simplified,). You also have width consideration but depth is easier to explain.

 

Back to minimizing grey, and specific to the TB game...... numbers based RPOs are typically the most simplistic. There's typically a finite number set for the box that triggers a pre-snap decision. If there's only 5 or 6 guys in the box, it triggers a run. If there's 8, typically triggers a pass. If there's 5 sitting up on the LOS (double stuffing A and/or B gaps like TB was doing to us), it triggers a pass. Now you can have some grey here if they drop out. So if you have a 3-4 front, with 5 up sitting tight on the LOS, the pre snap read is pass, but if 1 or 2 drop out prior to the snap, or right after the snap, it could become a "movement" based RPO (resulting in a run). Depends how complex or how much grey we allow in our RPOs. 

 

Disclaimer or FWIW... I've never coached. I've helped out with coaching camps (and rec) a few times before in my younger days, and attended/watched some of the larger camp type settings for HS kids (like Elite 11 and UA) that are big in the recruiting world. Some basic skills, other advanced (like Elite 11 regionals for the top HS QBs). I'm no RPO expert or QB pro, but I know the basics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Thunderbolt said:

Passing that many times increases the pressure on the QB b/c they expect him to pass on every play obviously.  That strip sack on Wentz was his fault, should have step up in the pocket, he stayed too far back like a statue and didn't move up, one of the turning points in the game I think.

They were stuffing both A gaps on the regular, so not a typical pocket to step up into. When they are run blitzing like that, you have to stay back. Sorry, but Fisher got boat raced, and owns that turnover. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Lord.  The thread should be merged with the Frank Grievance thread.  

 

As to the topic:

 

As expected, the defense has taken a step back as it recovers from Ballard's poor drafting.  Paye and Dayo's rookie year offers less production that the guys who left, Autry and Houston, as expected by everyone.  Rhodes has also taken a step back, Willis and Blackmon have been injured and replaced with guys not in the NFL when signed, for the most part. And Oke is still Oke.  

 

The defense struggles to hold leads in the second halves when it plays soft zone, (BALT, NYJ), Man (SEA, BALT), drops linemen into coverage (at least BALT) and stunts or blitzes (Tampa).  The DC is challenged to be a genius with the talent he has been having to play with, and is often miscast as a * by those wanting to feel smart on the internet.

 

As to the play calling saga, some new topics are emerging to bash Frank with:

 

  • Funny still how giving up 37 points has not been mentioned much.  Maybe because it had little to do with Brady vs Flus' soft zone and more about Fournette vs stunts and blitzes and our relatively unstout DL (no Suh or Vea?).
  • A play caller is criticized for not being a genius if he cant score 41 points to win.  Apparently, by not being creative enough in the running game against a stout line. 
  • Frank should channel his inner Pep Hamilton.
  • With an RPO, the QB makes the decision if its a run or pass.
  • You can bet the QB has a probability in his head of what he's going to decide when he looks presnap....its likely not a 50/50 decision when the ball is snapped.
  • I doubt that Bowles smartly and cleverly out witted Frank by "baiting" him into throwing the ball to a 6'4" WR against a 5'9" FS.  If he did, please Todd, bait Frank often.  

 

Oh, and one way to run out the clock would be to play a soft zone on defense...you know...make the other guy throw it in the middle short so the clock keeps moving.  We don't have to be Pep Hamilton on offense. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Thunderbolt said:

Passing that many times increases the pressure on the QB b/c they expect him to pass on every play obviously.  That strip sack on Wentz was his fault, should have step up in the pocket, he stayed too far back like a statue and didn't move up, one of the turning points in the game I think.

The guy on Glowinski had pushed Glow into Wentz's lap. Couldn't step up. Broadcasters pointed that out.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Shive and any others that are interested in RPO basics.

https://insider.afca.com/xs-os-run-pass-options-rpo-simplified/

 

Shive - I just found this as I wanted to make sure I got things right lol. I did pretty good. I always get tripped up on the movement based RPO, but think I did decent explaining it. I also found some more advanced stuff if interested. Let me know. The link above is quick easy read and hits the basics. There's other articles out there that go more complex and farther than movement, numbers, and leverage. Also some vids if you prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Thunderbolt said:

Passing that many times increases the pressure on the QB b/c they expect him to pass on every play obviously.  That strip sack on Wentz was his fault, should have step up in the pocket, he stayed too far back like a statue and didn't move up, one of the turning points in the game I think.

You need to watch that play again…hell Olsen even pointed it out during the game. The RG (not sure if Glow or Reed was in at the time) got pushed back damn near into Carson’s lap…there was no pocket to step up in. 
 

Edit - sorry just seen where someone already pointed this out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

My Lord.  The thread should be merged with the Frank Grievance thread.  

 

As to the topic:

 

As expected, the defense has taken a step back as it recovers from Ballard's poor drafting.  Paye and Dayo's rookie year offers less production that the guys who left, Autry and Houston, as expected by everyone.  Rhodes has also taken a step back, Willis and Blackmon have been injured and replaced with guys not in the NFL when signed, for the most part. And Oke is still Oke.  

 

The defense struggles to hold leads in the second halves when it plays soft zone, (BALT, NYJ), Man (SEA, BALT), drops linemen into coverage (at least BALT) and stunts or blitzes (Tampa).  The DC is challenged to be a genius with the talent he has been having to play with, and is often miscast as a * by those wanting to feel smart on the internet.

 

As to the play calling saga, some new topics are emerging to bash Frank with:

 

  • Funny still how giving up 37 points has not been mentioned much.  Maybe because it had little to do with Brady vs Flus' soft zone and more about Fournette vs stunts and blitzes and our relatively unstout DL (no Suh or Vea?).
  • A play caller is criticized for not being a genius if he cant score 41 points to win.  Apparently, by not being creative enough in the running game against a stout line. 
  • Frank should channel his inner Pep Hamilton.
  • With an RPO, the QB makes the decision if its a run or pass.
  • You can bet the QB has a probability in his head of what he's going to decide when he looks presnap....its likely not a 50/50 decision when the ball is snapped.
  • I doubt that Bowles smartly and cleverly out witted Frank by "baiting" him into throwing the ball to a 6'4" WR against a 5'9" FS.  If he did, please Todd, bait Frank often.  

 

Oh, and one way to run out the clock would be to play a soft zone on defense...you know...make the other guy throw it in the middle short so the clock keeps moving.  We don't have to be Pep Hamilton on offense. 

 

 

Not sure if you noticed, but many have said our D sucks for a good long while. Another thread on our D was just created today. Personally, I was critical of the D early last year, when we ranked high in a lot of categories (due to soft schedule) while everyone was sunshine pumping them. We all know what happened after that. But I know it's your MO to deflect by all means possible... 

 

Now to your bullets. Nobody is criticizing him for not scoring 41. They are criticizing him primarily for 1) icing our best player once again, 2) going pass happy, which pass happy leads to a greater chance of turnovers and less clock run, and 3) doing what Bowles wanted us to do, which was getting into a shootout with the goat.

 

BTW, on your last bullet... Bowles is good. He is smart. And he is clever. Reich even said as much. Did you listen to the presser? He knew exactly what he was doing, and he knew exactly how we would react. 

 

And bonus.. on your "baiting" comment.... Winfield, that 5-10 S you are poking fun at, is arguably the best safety in the league. So yes, Bowles wanted us to throw at him. I believe he's graded the #2 S in the league..... And yes, he INT'd a ball. Sometimes you make it so easy lol.. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...