What have we learned

[EastStreet]

10 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Wentz made his line look much worse than it was. He was mentally slow and had a limited number of throws he liked to make. And he struggled to make those.

 Tann & Garap play a better game than him. Don't let the touchdown and int. #'s be your be all end all with your assessment.

 

Sorry, but Wentz didn't have to help Fish look awful. Fish was on skates all by himself. I agree a quick trigger like Rivers helps, but our OL was just not good. Trying to blame all the badness of the OL on Wentz is just intellectual dishonesty.  

 

Tan and Garap would be better in Reich's conservative short passing scheme, but folks would not be happy with either long term. And we don't have the roster to go deep with a limited game manager like LAR does, or TN for that matter. TN had a great D this year, but Tan struggled when he didn't have Henry playing like a monster, or when their D struggled on occasion. And SF just lost despite a tremendous defense yet again, because Jimmy couldn't get it done late in games. Neither QB will "win" you a lot of games on their own. But they are probably better fits for Reich's scheme and play calling. I think Wentz would be a better fit for an OC that is more L2 and L3... 

[EastStreet]

9 hours ago, Les Poulains said:

Everyone already knows that. Jonathan Taylor, as great as he is, isn't actually all that important to success. Neither is a left guard.

Well, he was important to success in a lot of games this year. He took some games over. 

 

But I think Reich agrees with you, as he was shelved several times... 

[2006Coltsbestever]

16 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

 

Yeah but if they had this guy has an O.lineman - things would've been different  

[EastStreet]

5 hours ago, coltsfan_canada said:

 

I think if Wentz leave to somewhere with offensive minded coach I think he will do good specially like TB with Bruce Arians then we will really regret Wentz I know I know he ain't Tom Brady or Peyton but I do think with better line protection lets evaluate him again. He showed he was better than last year when he had little better support but he will need more support. I think there are some QB who makes WR / TE look good and there are QB they need good support I think Wentz is later one. He can be good but with good support. 

 

Agree 100%. He improved this year in many areas. And improved without the benefit of a good pass pro and weapons. Fixing the OL and adding some weapons will help a lot. Not sure it'll be enough, but you have to try. 

 

And I agree a play caller / scheme that attacks the L2 and L3 more is probably a better fit for CW.

[2006Coltsbestever]

9 hours ago, Les Poulains said:

Everyone already knows that. Jonathan Taylor, as great as he is, isn't actually all that important to success. Neither is a left guard.

Nor is Tannehill who you said was all world - QB that stunk when it counted and I called it, thank you. 

[DougDew]

9 hours ago, Les Poulains said:

Everyone already knows that. Jonathan Taylor, as great as he is, isn't actually all that important to success. Neither is a left guard.

The point that people are missing is that both JT and Nelson are very important to this offense, because of the lack of other important pieces.

 

They are vital to this offense, but are more vital than they should be.

[pgt_rob]

Colts don’t have a 1st rounder now. They have picks #42, #82, #119, #157, #178, #215, #235 and #236. This is going to be a tough draft for Ballard in my opinion and I don’t think we have a lot of cash to spend in FA. Somewhere around $40M but possibly less. Might double dip WRs for the first couple picks. Try to scoop up an edge rusher in FA and possibly another vet WR too. Our offense was very 1 dimensional outside of Taylor and Pittmann. Would be nice to get more weapons for Wentz to at least try to prove himself next season. 

[Knuckles79]

7 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Uhhh of course. Since Wentz does the same thing what is your point?

 I really like how JG makes quick decisions, gets the ball out quickly when needed, and throws all kinds of high quality, on target with touch passes.

 And this is NOT at all what Wentz has any gift for. Did you miss this?

  https://www.nfl.com/news/ranking-the-14-playoff-quarterbacks-based-on-ngs-new-passing-score-metric?campaign=Twitter_atn

 And of course i found this very interesting.

And BTW, i do not want JG.  I would would take his Head way over duh Wentz, but do want a bigger arm. lol

You did notice he has two players in the top 16 yards after catch and the colts have zero. I am not sold on wentz but no way is Jimmy a upgrade. He makes the same exact mistake everyone says wentz makes but with a better pass protection and better weapons 

[Les Poulains]

16 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Nor is Tannehill who you said was all world - QB that stunk when it counted and I called it, thank you. 

Lmao, you still don't understand what that argument was about, it's hilarious. By the way, it's actually me that was proven right because I said Wentz should be used as a game manager like Tannehill was used in the playoffs in 2020, or he'd cost us. Meanwhile, you were arguing that Wentz was better than Tannehill, which he clearly isn't. Oopsies.

 

It turns out my point was exactly right. Tannehill was victorious in the playoffs after excellent regular seasons when the Titans took the ball out of his hands and gave it to Henry a million times. This year, Henry wasn't 100% and they had to rely on Tannehill, which cost them. Had we made the playoffs, we'd have had to use Wentz in that same way, handing it to Taylor all game, or Wentz would have killed us.

 

I could have claimed victory on that, but I don't look for validation on the internet like a certain someone.

[2006Coltsbestever]

55 minutes ago, Les Poulains said:

Lmao, you still don't understand what that argument was about, it's hilarious. By the way, it's actually me that was proven right because I said Wentz should be used as a game manager like Tannehill was used in the playoffs in 2020, or he'd cost us. Meanwhile, you were arguing that Wentz was better than Tannehill, which he clearly isn't. Oopsies.

 

It turns out my point was exactly right. Tannehill was victorious in the playoffs after excellent regular seasons when the Titans took the ball out of his hands and gave it to Henry a million times. This year, Henry wasn't 100% and they had to rely on Tannehill, which cost them. Had we made the playoffs, we'd have had to use Wentz in that same way, handing it to Taylor all game, or Wentz would have killed us.

 

I could have claimed victory on that, but I don't look for validation on the internet like a certain someone.

Bottomline is both QB's are game managers. My only point was when we were going back and forth I felt like Wentz had a better year this year. Tannehill had twice the INT's and both threw for roughly the same amount of yards. Yeah Tennessee had a better record but I knew it would get them nowhere. They had HFA and still couldn't do anything with Tannehill. 

[Nickster]

On 1/30/2022 at 11:17 PM, EastStreet said:

 

I think we underutilized him several games (only 15 carries against the 3rd worst run D / Jax is a head scratcher), and we over utilized him some games (Houston for example).... And yes, I do look at Reich.

 

Not saying at all Taylor was a bad move. I think he was a great move. Just need to use him, and other weapons, better.

Did you watch the game East?  He had 8 carries for 18 yds in the 1st half.  And 6 of those carries were for 2 yds. or less.  Then they started the 2nd half handing to him 3 straight times.  After that they were down 2 scores late.  

I was at the Home Jags game. On the 1st two drives, he had 92 yds on10 carries.  That's great.   

After that he had 26 yds on 11 carries. 

 

So in 5 Quarters of play from 2nd drive at home until the 2nd half of the Away Jags game he had 19 carries for 42 yds.  He was being stifled by the Jags.  I don't see how anyone could have a "head scratcher" as to why we didn't just keep feeding a running game which had averaged 2.1 ypc for 5 Qs in a row.

 

He was stifled by the Jags after the first two home drives.

 

He got some garbage later in the Home game, but the Jags shut our running game down and manhandled our OLINE from late 1Q in Jags first meeting.   

 

He was also targeted 8 times at home for a whopping 10 yds.  He was targeted on the road 4 times for 18 yds. 
 

So maybe we should have "utilized" him more, but there wasn't a lot of evidence v. Jags pointing to that as a clear way to success. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

The coach or the QB usually always gets the blame for the loss, been saying that for 45 years of watching. I without a doubt don't always buy it but Wentz was terrible against Jacksonville as was Tannehill vs Cincy, as was Hurts vs Tampa. At least when Jimmy G even plays bad, his teams are usually in it until the end. He wins a lot and I would take him over those 3. Jimmy G had made 2 final 4's and a SB, those other guys haven't accomplished that.

 

Reich isn't why we lost at Jacks, that is on Wentz having a 4.4 QBR rating = fact and our pass D making Lawrence look like Montana.

[DougDew]

17 hours ago, pgt_rob said:

Would be nice to get more weapons for Wentz to at least try to prove himself next season. 

The problem is, is that I would not rely upon rookies to provide that help their first season.  Pitt and JT were nice, but they had their struggles their rookie year, as examples.

 

Bring in a vet TE, (Ertz?), and/or a vet WR then give them a few games to mesh with Wentz.  

[DougDew]

30 minutes ago, Nickster said:

Did you watch the game East?  He had 8 carries for 18 yds in the 1st half.  And 6 of those carries were for 2 yds. or less.  Then they started the 2nd half handing to him 3 straight times.  After that they were down 2 scores late.  

I was at the Home Jags game. On the 1st two drives, he had 92 yds on10 carries.  That's great.   

After that he had 26 yds on 11 carries. 

 

So in 5 Quarters of play from 2nd drive at home until the 2nd half of the Away Jags game he had 19 carries for 42 yds.  He was being stifled by the Jags.  I don't see how anyone could have a "head scratcher" as to why we didn't just keep feeding a running game which had averaged 2.1 ypc for 5 Qs in a row.

 

He was stifled by the Jags after the first two home drives.

 

He got some garbage later in the Home game, but the Jags shut our running game down and manhandled our OLINE from late 1Q in Jags first meeting.   

 

He was also targeted 8 times at home for a whopping 10 yds.  He was targeted on the road 4 times for 18 yds. 
 

So maybe we should have "utilized" him more, but there wasn't a lot of evidence v. Jags pointing to that as a clear way to success. 

I think that Frank should have called more sail routes to Mo to loosen things up....

[Maniac53]

On 1/30/2022 at 11:37 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

It's funny because before the season started, I wanted 3 options and posted them in here being:

 

1. Rivers coming back

 

2. Stafford as QB

 

3. Carr as QB

 

We went with Wentz instead. I thought for sure Stafford was coming here hearing all the rumors but nope.

I wanted the same thing. 1. I wanted Rivers back and I get two sides of the story. It was written on the wall Rivers was ready for retirement and I got Rivers retired cause Colts didn't want to pursue with him. What is true?? Haha I guess it doesn't matter now, we move on.

[Maniac53]

On 1/31/2022 at 2:17 AM, EastStreet said:

Rams are top 3 in sacks, and top 3 in INTs....

A lot of QBs don't do well against them.

 

I know we all view Wentz through a X100 lens, but there are a lot of QBs who perform badly in certain situations. 

28 QBs had more INTs than Wentz. And most of those QBs had better OLs and pass catchers... 

I see what you're saying everyone wants less INTs for sure. But if you have a QB that can bounce back after a turnover and score after he made his mistake I will take a 10 or 12 INT guy over a less INT guy. A lot Wentz short list of INTs were game changers. Plus he wasn't converting enough when the chains needed to be moved. We weren't scoring enough on offense either after Defense would convert and get turnovers.

[Maniac53]

On 1/31/2022 at 9:33 AM, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Wentz made his line look much worse than it was. He was mentally slow and had a limited number of throws he liked to make. And he struggled to make those.

 Tann & Garap play a better game than him. Don't let the touchdown and int. #'s be your be all end all with your assessment.

Wentz needs to get rid of ball quicker and hit more check downs. Stop trying to be the Hero on the long ball every short gain. JMO 

I'm not giving up on Wentz but worried about him whether he can be fixed. Lot of flaws with his game play. Still think he will be better on this team in a new season.

[EastStreet]

6 hours ago, Nickster said:

Did you watch the game East?  He had 8 carries for 18 yds in the 1st half.  And 6 of those carries were for 2 yds. or less.  Then they started the 2nd half handing to him 3 straight times.  After that they were down 2 scores late.  

I was at the Home Jags game. On the 1st two drives, he had 92 yds on10 carries.  That's great.   

After that he had 26 yds on 11 carries. 

 

So in 5 Quarters of play from 2nd drive at home until the 2nd half of the Away Jags game he had 19 carries for 42 yds.  He was being stifled by the Jags.  I don't see how anyone could have a "head scratcher" as to why we didn't just keep feeding a running game which had averaged 2.1 ypc for 5 Qs in a row.

 

He was stifled by the Jags after the first two home drives.

 

He got some garbage later in the Home game, but the Jags shut our running game down and manhandled our OLINE from late 1Q in Jags first meeting.   

 

He was also targeted 8 times at home for a whopping 10 yds.  He was targeted on the road 4 times for 18 yds. 
 

So maybe we should have "utilized" him more, but there wasn't a lot of evidence v. Jags pointing to that as a clear way to success. 

Just saying 8 carries and X yards isn't enough. 

 

He had one 1st down carry in those 8. 

His only 1st down carry was over Fisher's side/edge.... which is arguably our least successful gap on the OL this season.

Then.... Reich only ran him (the entire game) over Fisher, Q, and Kelly.... And only 1 of the 15 carries was over Q....

I mean, WTX? Really. 14 of your 15 runs are over arguably your worst guys... 

 

On the year, guess where he is most successful (over average)? 

The answer, Glow and Smith.... 

 

And before you ask... 

Left side success rate by gap...    55%-51%-47%

Right side success rate by gap.... 64%-60%-57%

 

Notice the delta???? It's punch you in the nose obvious...

So why zero right side rushes, when we are clearly more successful there?

 

I mean... does Frank not know this? lol...

 

Also, we came out pass happy, and just in general, only 1 first down rush in the 1H... That's simply not making running a priority. They simply chose to script passing early, not running. 

[EastStreet]

46 minutes ago, Maniac53 said:

I see what you're saying everyone wants less INTs for sure. But if you have a QB that can bounce back after a turnover and score after he made his mistake I will take a 10 or 12 INT guy over a less INT guy. A lot Wentz short list of INTs were game changers. Plus he wasn't converting enough when the chains needed to be moved. We weren't scoring enough on offense either after Defense would convert and get turnovers.

 

Wentz absolutely made some boneheaded plays. So did most QBs over the course of the year. 

Every QB not named Brady and Rodgers can be picked at.

We even saw Mahomes make several boneheaded decisions last week. But he has a top 10 OL and great weapons... And those things help hide a lot of the bone headed plays.

 

By the way, I'll take more INTs too. But I disagree with the narrative he didn't score enough. Given our play selection and heavy short possession routes, we made it awfully easy on Ds to play up. No D respected us 15+ yards cause we simply didn't throw it much outside of -5 to 10 yards. 

[Maniac53]

15 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Wentz absolutely made some boneheaded plays. So did most QBs over the course of the year. 

Every QB not named Brady and Rodgers can be picked at.

We even saw Mahomes make several boneheaded decisions last week. But he has a top 10 OL and great weapons... And those things help hide a lot of the bone headed plays.

 

By the way, I'll take more INTs too. But I disagree with the narrative he didn't score enough. Given our play selection and heavy short possession routes, we made it awfully easy on Ds to play up. No D respected us 15+ yards cause we simply didn't throw it much outside of -5 to 10 yards. 

The OL wasn't great at pass protection this year. Could be why not many passes outside of 10 yards. On the other side, Wentz would force feed Pittman even in tight coverage and double coverage. Wentz just wasn't making the plays needed to move the chains. I don't blame it all on him cause this team was far from being balanced.

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, Maniac53 said:

The OL wasn't great at pass protection this year. Could be why not many passes outside of 10 yards. On the other side, Wentz would force feed Pittman even in tight coverage and double coverage. Wentz just wasn't making the plays needed to move the chains. I don't blame it all on him cause this team was far from being balanced.

OL was great last year (2020), and we didn't throw deep either (yet Rivers was top 10 in deep accuracy). 

OL was great in 2019, and we didn't throw deep (JB had a cannon)

 

At this point, it's a scheme limitation until I see something different. 

 

[Maniac53]

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

OL was great last year (2020), and we didn't throw deep either (yet Rivers was top 10 in deep accuracy). 

OL was great in 2019, and we didn't throw deep (JB had a cannon)

 

At this point, it's a scheme limitation until I see something different. 

 

What was the difference between 2019 and 2020 compared to 2021? Were there more injuries and more impacted by Covid? Was it scheme and was scheme changed due to the injuries and Covid? I don't know, that is why I'm asking why scheme and pass protection was so different.

I don't think I would compare Rivers with Wentz. Rivers is and was a better QB

[EastStreet]

8 minutes ago, Maniac53 said:

What was the difference between 2019 and 2020 compared to 2021? Were there more injuries and more impacted by Covid? Was it scheme and was scheme changed due to the injuries and Covid? I don't know, that is why I'm asking why scheme and pass protection was so different.

I don't think I would compare Rivers with Wentz. Rivers is and was a better QB

Rivers is a great L1 passer when protected. He was bad when not protected in LAC. Stats and outcomes are crystal clear...  He did well behind our top 3 OL in Reich's short scheme. 

 

Wentz is a good L2/3 passer when protected. He had top 5 OLs in 17, 18, and 19, and played well those 3 years. All three of those years had great INT%s, and good to great QBRs. He went off the tracks in 2020 when both his OL and WR unit were devastated by injury. His pass pro protection graded even worse this year, still didn't have great weapons, yet he improved from 2020.  

 

Some of the dumb narratives like "Wentz cause our OL to be bad" is just next level dumb... Wentz had 3 top 5 OLs three years in a row lol.... In 2020 and 2021 he had bad OLs, plain in simple. When he had good OLs, he played well. When he had bad OLs, he played bad... Pretty simple.

 

[Maniac53]

12 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Rivers is a great L1 passer when protected. He was bad when not protected in LAC. Stats and outcomes are crystal clear...  He did well behind our top 3 OL in Reich's short scheme. 

 

Wentz is a good L2/3 passer when protected. He had top 5 OLs in 17, 18, and 19, and played well those 3 years. All three of those years had great INT%s, and good to great QBRs. He went off the tracks in 2020 when both his OL and WR unit were devastated by injury. His pass pro protection graded even worse this year, still didn't have great weapons, yet he improved from 2020.  

 

Some of the dumb narratives like "Wentz cause our OL to be bad" is just next level dumb... Wentz had 3 top 5 OLs three years in a row lol.... In 2020 and 2021 he had bad OLs, plain in simple. When he had good OLs, he played well. When he had bad OLs, he played bad... Pretty simple.

 

Okay, you gave me why Rivers and Wentz is good and bad with different OL narratives. So are you answering my post by saying scheme? If so, why was the scheme changed? If it was so great 2019 and 2020. Why change it?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Is anyone surprised we haven’t signed any of our own guys yet?

[EastStreet]

37 minutes ago, Maniac53 said:

Okay, you gave me why Rivers and Wentz is good and bad with different OL narratives. So are you answering my post by saying scheme? If so, why was the scheme changed? If it was so great 2019 and 2020. Why change it?

Not saying scheme was good at all in 2019 and 2020. 

IMO it was overly conservative (too heavy short and possession passing routes) the last 3 years.

Personnel usage the last 3 years is also a head scratcher... 

 

 

[NewColtsFan]

32 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Is anyone surprised we haven’t signed any of our own guys yet?

A little….   But most of that will happen in the last few weeks of February and first 10-days of March as we approach free agency.   Right now it’s just too soon. 

[EastStreet]

43 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

Is anyone surprised we haven’t signed any of our own guys yet?

FA doesn't start till mid March. 

We don't really have a lot of "must re-sign" guys.

I'd assume most will be told to test the market, and they can't test the market till March 14th ish IIRC.

I'm sure we'll see a few pop, but doubt we'll see a lot of early signs/extensions

[coach kline]

On 1/30/2022 at 10:48 PM, joeb said:

I am on the side of QB change. Maybe we could trade Wentz and sign jimmy garapollo. He's 32 yrs. old. 5 yrs. 150 mil. Not a problem. 

Same mold as wentz

[PRnum1]

On 1/31/2022 at 10:01 AM, Colt.45 said:

Many lessons.

 

#1) This is a passing league, build with that as the foundation of everything you do. (This is not a new lesson, some of us have been speaking about the way Ballard chose to build and worrying about it. This season, Chris Ballard has come to understand it). So maybe it's not a new lesson, more of a reinforced lesson.

 

#2) There are MANY ways to get to the promised land. 

#3) Coaching doesnt matter....until it does. Cincy had no business winning that game, not with the nonsense offensive gameplay they put out. KC had no business losing that game, not till the coach pooped the bed.

#4) It isn't just about one guy. We've all talked ad nauseam about needing the QB, and why we need one. The position is by far the most important. We saw yesterday WHY you have to have more than just the ability to pass the ball. When Mahomes went inside the toilet in the second half, KC had NOTHING to counter with, zero run game.

 

 

While I agree with much of what you say, to me the game was won by a brilliant defensive strategy employed be the Bengals defense.

1. In the second half, Bengals switched to rushing 3 and dropping 8 in coverage.  They had a spy on Mahomey as well.  The 8 men in coverage seemed to really confuse him.  Chiefs only scored 3 points the entire second half.
2. Does coaching matter ?  I think it does.  The Bengals DC gambled and went to the 8 in coverage, rushing 3 with a spy.  Would Eberflus have done that ?
3. Burrow had a solid game, I think 250 yards 2 tds/1 int.  Solid game by him but by no means did he carry that team.

 

So to me it was the Bengals defense that won the game.  Sam Hubbard was a monster out there terrorizing Mahomey.  Mahomey was flummoxed, and threw the int in overtime which sealed KC's fate.

 

So we definitely need pass rush like Hubbard and we don't have that now.  Maybe Paye and Dayo will develop into that ?  Maybe not. 

[Colt.45]

30 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:

While I agree with much of what you say, to me the game was won by a brilliant defensive strategy employed be the Bengals defense.

1. In the second half, Bengals switched to rushing 3 and dropping 8 in coverage.  They had a spy on Mahomey as well.  The 8 men in coverage seemed to really confuse him.  Chiefs only scored 3 points the entire second half.
2. Does coaching matter ?  I think it does.  The Bengals DC gambled and went to the 8 in coverage, rushing 3 with a spy.  Would Eberflus have done that ?
3. Burrow had a solid game, I think 250 yards 2 tds/1 int.  Solid game by him but by no means did he carry that team.

 

So to me it was the Bengals defense that won the game.  Sam Hubbard was a monster out there terrorizing Mahomey.  Mahomey was flummoxed, and threw the int in overtime which sealed KC's fate.

 

So we definitely need pass rush like Hubbard and we don't have that now.  Maybe Paye and Dayo will develop into that ?  Maybe not. 

 When a team drops 8 in coverage, you gotta run the ball. That defense didnt do anything overtly great, it wasnt like they were Tampa in last year's Super Bowl. Mahomes played his worst half of football ever...the Chiefs just had to run it.

 

Coaching matters until it doesnt. They gambled that the Chiefs wouldn't be able to run it, and they were right. Eberflus did that in Buffalo this season.

 

I hate to say this but KC lost that game more than Cincy won it. Mahomes particularly lost them that game. He made bad decisions and was poor and inaccurate.