Colts @ Rams post game thread

[2006Coltsbestever]

41 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

For everyone complaining WR can’t get separation. Look at this screen shot.  This was the play where Pittman had his face mask pulled. AR just threw it too late. Look at the separation Pittman has here.

 

 

That was a PI and a personal foul. The REFS laid a turd on that one. 

[JediXMan]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

That was a PI and a personal foul. The REFS laid a turd on that one. 

Yet called a nonsense defenseless call on Moore smh.

[Moosejawcolt]

Listening to Rick Venturi and I am all in and have been for years. Scrap this defensive and the coach. People continually say this D gets gassed. I have always been on record is that qbs become comfortable with this D as the game goes on. Plus, Stafford was on one leg. What were we not blitzing the crap out of him? No, we play zone and rush 4 and the D Line, overrated when rushing 4, puts on no pressure. God it is the same old story with this D. We blitzed Jackson but rushed 4 playing an injured immobile qb??  Bradley continually gets out coached and/or he has little faith in his personnel. Whatever it is, something gotta give!

[Fluke_33]

2 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Stafford was on one leg. What were we not blitzing the crap out of him?

 

When Staffprd got hurt i thought, oh man that guy is really tough and our D is going to kill him.  Then saw no pass rush.  That was definitely a down point of an otherwise great game.

[Moosejawcolt]

1 minute ago, Fluke_33 said:

 

When Staffprd got hurt i thought, oh man that guy is really tough and our D is going to kill him.  Then saw no pass rush.  That was definitely a down point of an otherwise great game.

yeah but it is a continuous theme with Bradley. He fails repeatedly to be aggressive when warranted. I dont think Steichen brings him back unless he changes. Steichen is aggressive on offence, so i doubt he will tolerate the gaffs

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, Fluke_33 said:

 

When Staffprd got hurt i thought, oh man that guy is really tough and our D is going to kill him.  Then saw no pass rush.  That was definitely a down point of an otherwise great game.

Credit to Stafford, he got the ball out just in time on a few of those throws and his accuracy was pinpoint impressive. When he got injured, I thought we had them for sure but he is a winner and a great Veteran QB. He may not make the Hall of Fame but he might, he does have a ring and great numbers.  

[Fluke_33]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Credit to Stafford, he got the ball out just in time on a few of those throws and his accuracy was pinpoint impressive. When he got injured, I thought we had them for sure but he is a winner and a great Veteran QB. He may not make the Hall of Fame but he might, he does have a ring and great numbers.  

Dude is a beast.   That time in detroit where it seemed like his arm popped out of his socket and he wouldn't come out.  Love that.

[2006Coltsbestever]

12 minutes ago, Fluke_33 said:

Dude is a beast.   That time in detroit where it seemed like his arm popped out of his socket and he wouldn't come out.  Love that.

Yeah I remember that game, he pulled the game out for a win. He made the Lions relevant much like Matt Ryan did in Atlanta, both got drafted by crappy franchises and were great but were always overlooked because of who they played for. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

yeah but it is a continuous theme with Bradley. He fails repeatedly to be aggressive when warranted. I dont think Steichen brings him back unless he changes. Steichen is aggressive on offence, so i doubt he will tolerate the gaffs

 

The names and faces change through the years with colts coaches but the results don't. 

[Moosejawcolt]

4 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

The names and faces change through the years with colts coaches but the results don't. 

I do have a lot of faith in Steichen. By all reports he is Brillant and he knows  i bet he has a good grasp what needs to be changed on the other side of the ball. To me not blitzing a one legged qb in the game is something that me and/or you would take advantage of . I was down on Eberflus and I am also out on Bradley. I just find these Cover 2 and/or Cover 3 defensive coordinators fail to scheme out of their comfort zones. I want a more creative mind.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

5 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I do have a lot of faith in Steichen. By all reports he is Brillant and he knows  i bet he has a good grasp what needs to be changed on the other side of the ball. To me not blitzing a one legged qb in the game is something that me and/or you would take advantage of . I was down on Eberflus and I am also out on Bradley. I just find these Cover 2 and/or Cover 3 defensive coordinators fail to scheme out of their comfort zones. I want a more creative mind.

 

I agree  with you about the cover 2/3 concept. To me a defense is supposed to be aggressive. Of course there is a time and place for everything, including soft zone cover 2/3....but not when the opposing offense will win the game with a score. 

[1959Colts]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Listening to Rick Venturi and I am all in and have been for years. Scrap this defensive and the coach. People continually say this D gets gassed. I have always been on record is that qbs become comfortable with this D as the game goes on. Plus, Stafford was on one leg. What were we not blitzing the crap out of him? No, we play zone and rush 4 and the D Line, overrated when rushing 4, puts on no pressure. God it is the same old story with this D. We blitzed Jackson but rushed 4 playing an injured immobile qb??  Bradley continually gets out coached and/or he has little faith in his personnel. Whatever it is, something gotta give!

again I will say... I thought it was ridiculous, back during the HC search, when it was leaked out, the Colts were insisting that the new head coach candidates had to bring back Bradley and his entire defensive staff.

[Moosejawcolt]

20 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:

again I will say... I thought it was ridiculous, back during the HC search, when it was leaked out, the Colts were insisting that the new head coach candidates had to bring back Bradley and his entire defensive staff.

Thats on Ballard and most likely they didnt want to do a whole defensive scheme  change. Lets focus on the offence and have some stability on the defensive side of the ball. I am sure that Steichen is evaluating Bradley as he will not think twice about punting him if he is not satisfied. So far, I am out on Bradley and the last game was horrible in not getting any pressure on a hobbled qb and allowing him to dice up the D. To many late game collapses which everyone always chalked up as the D being gassed. Thats rubbish.

[Moosejawcolt]

28 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I agree  with you about the cover 2/3 concept. To me a defense is supposed to be aggressive. Of course there is a time and place for everything, including soft zone cover 2/3....but not when the opposing offense will win the game with a score. 

U dont play soft zone in over time!! Points are sacred. I said it years ago that Ballard was wrong for bringing back this D to Indy. Its   out dated and even Seattle has abandoned it by drafting an elite man corner with their 5th pick

[a06cc]

All I know is those 2 first quarter penalties didn’t cost us the game. We lost as a team and left points on the board I feel. Get’s make them adjustments and win this coming Sunday 

[Superman]

3 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I do have a lot of faith in Steichen. By all reports he is Brillant and he knows  i bet he has a good grasp what needs to be changed on the other side of the ball. To me not blitzing a one legged qb in the game is something that me and/or you would take advantage of . I was down on Eberflus and I am also out on Bradley. I just find these Cover 2 and/or Cover 3 defensive coordinators fail to scheme out of their comfort zones. I want a more creative mind.

 

I'm not a fan of Bradley for the most part. I gave him credit for the gameplan last week, getting aggressive against Lamar. This week, he was mostly back to his usual conservative gameplan. Not a shocker, but disappointing.

 

Still, it helps to acknowledge the circumstances. By the end of the game, we're using replacement players at every level of the defense. We lost a corner (already a thin position), lost a LB, and were limited at DL. And more blitzing probably doesn't help us cover Nacua any better. And the biggest defensive problem in this game, IMO, was the dreadful tackling. It was especially bad in the first quarter, and then it hurt us again in OT. So I don't know if the scheme and the gameplan were the difference in this one. We're not great in coverage, our tackling sucked, and the pass rush wasn't producing. That's a recipe for disaster, especially against a QB like Stafford.

[Indyfan4life]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm not a fan of Bradley for the most part. I gave him credit for the gameplan last week, getting aggressive against Lamar. This week, he was mostly back to his usual conservative gameplan. Not a shocker, but disappointing.

 

Still, it helps to acknowledge the circumstances. By the end of the game, we're using replacement players at every level of the defense. We lost a corner (already a thin position), lost a LB, and were limited at DL. And more blitzing probably doesn't help us cover Nacua any better. And the biggest defensive problem in this game, IMO, was the dreadful tackling. It was especially bad in the first quarter, and then it hurt us again in OT. So I don't know if the scheme and the gameplan were the difference in this one. We're not great in coverage, our tackling sucked, and the pass rush wasn't producing. That's a recipe for disaster, especially against a QB like Stafford.

Having Buck and Stewart in the entire game would have made things a lot different I think. But that’s football. 

[jvan1973]

2 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

U dont play soft zone in over time!! Points are sacred. I said it years ago that Ballard was wrong for bringing back this D to Indy. Its   out dated and even Seattle has abandoned it by drafting an elite man corner with their 5th pick

It's amazing you're not employed by the NFL.  Or even the CFL

[jvan1973]

3 hours ago, 1959Colts said:

again I will say... I thought it was ridiculous, back during the HC search, when it was leaked out, the Colts were insisting that the new head coach candidates had to bring back Bradley and his entire defensive staff.

That was an opinion.   It was never leaked Bradley must stay.   

[1959Colts]

55 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

That was an opinion.   It was never leaked Bradley must stay.   

Maybe "leaked" was not the correct wording. But I remember watching a Colts podcast, and the guy was visibly upset, that he had received inside information, that the team was demanding the new coach keep Bradley and all his assistants. It could be that this guy was making the whole thing up? But I believed him.

...and then a few days later, it was exactly as he had predicted, One would think a new HC would want a few of his own on the defensive side?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I don’t know if every knows this or not but Steichen actually started his coaching career on the defensive side of the ball. I bet he has some input and questions for Bradley.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 hour ago, 1959Colts said:

Maybe "leaked" was not the correct wording. But I remember watching a Colts podcast, and the guy was visibly upset, that he had received inside information, that the team was demanding the new coach keep Bradley and all his assistants. It could be that this guy was making the whole thing up? But I believed him.

...and then a few days later, it was exactly as he had predicted, One would think a new HC would want a few of his own on the defensive side?

Except Jason left out a important piece that Steichen had history with Bradley so it made sense.  Especially when your hiring a offensive coach. Bradley does not have very good players in the secondary. It needs almost a complete overhaul.

 

I don’t know why he played zone against stafford. Vet QB eat that up. Plus for young corners it’s easier to play man. Too much communication needed for zone.  Stability on defense was the right thing plus all the good DC were already hired.

[Hawkeyecolt]

I’m good with Bradley.  He changed up his coverages a lot last year.  He wants always in cover 3.   He’s creative with his stunts and when he does call up a blitz it is usually effective. I’m not going to complain about the young corners. They’re getting valuable experience.   It’s a shame Flowers got injured.  He was the best corner on the field.  I haven’t seen the PFF grade but I thought Moore got roasted most of the day. 
 

My complaint is how they used their defensive line rotation.  With the depth they had at DE, I would have preferred to see Dayo play inside instead of Bryan. Bryan was terrible.  Playing OT with Johnson and Bryan at DT’s is why the Rams marched down the field so easily. 

[Superman]

16 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Except Jason left out a important piece that Steichen had history with Bradley so it made sense.  Especially when your hiring a offensive coach. Bradley does not have very good players in the secondary. It needs almost a complete overhaul.

 

I don’t know why he played zone against stafford. Vet QB eat that up. Plus for young corners it’s easier to play man. Too much communication needed for zone.  Stability on defense was the right thing plus all the good DC were already hired.

 

I think the rumor that Bradley was untouchable was kind of shaded by Ballard and Steichen, but who knows. Either way, it was never a huge deal to me. Not only is there a benefit to a rookie HC having an experienced DC, but I also think it's a solid idea to let Steichen focus on building his offensive staff in Year 1, and not have to worry about the defensive staff unless he decides it's necessary. I'm not a Bradley fan, but keeping him this season made sense to me.

 

As for playing zone, that's what Bradley does. I don't agree that it's easier for young corners to play man. Sure, it's simpler, but few teams plan a lot of man coverage anymore because of how hard it is to cover receivers in the modern NFL. And we don't have personnel for man coverage, not at corner, safety, or LB. But there are lots of ways to play zone, and Bradley's philosophy is overly conservative for my tastes.

 

The defense was playing fast, physical, aggressive, and mostly tackling well the first three games. Still fast on Sunday, but not physical enough, tackling was bad, and we made too many mistakes on the back end. There was actually a lot of tight coverage, several contested throws, some batted balls... but the mistakes and big 3rd down conversions, and especially the walk off TD, overshadows most of that. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

11 minutes ago, Hawkeyecolt said:

I’m good with Bradley.  He changed up his coverages a lot last year.  He wants always in cover 3.   He’s creative with his stunts and when he does call up a blitz it is usually effective. I’m not going to complain about the young corners. They’re getting valuable experience.   It’s a shame Flowers got injured.  He was the best corner on the field.  I haven’t seen the PFF grade but I thought Moore got roasted most of the day. 
 

My complaint is how they used their defensive line rotation.  With the depth they had at DE, I would have preferred to see Dayo play inside instead of Bryan. Bryan was terrible.  Playing OT with Johnson and Bryan at DT’s is why the Rams marched down the field so easily. 

Yep should of been Dayo.  He is the closest to Buckner size and is pretty good with the run too. Paye being out Sunday I can’t wait to see Dayo all game if paye doesn’t play. I just hope Buckner and Grove are healed.

[coltsfan_canada]

I usually love PFF thread posted with description how each player did. No thread was posted for this game. were the scores that bad  ?

[Solid84]

4 hours ago, coltsfan_canada said:

I usually love PFF thread posted with description how each player did. No thread was posted for this game. were the scores that bad  ?

I will do it later today. 

[Moosejawcolt]

On 10/3/2023 at 4:33 PM, Superman said:

 

I'm not a fan of Bradley for the most part. I gave him credit for the gameplan last week, getting aggressive against Lamar. This week, he was mostly back to his usual conservative gameplan. Not a shocker, but disappointing.

 

Still, it helps to acknowledge the circumstances. By the end of the game, we're using replacement players at every level of the defense. We lost a corner (already a thin position), lost a LB, and were limited at DL. And more blitzing probably doesn't help us cover Nacua any better. And the biggest defensive problem in this game, IMO, was the dreadful tackling. It was especially bad in the first quarter, and then it hurt us again in OT. So I don't know if the scheme and the gameplan were the difference in this one. We're not great in coverage, our tackling sucked, and the pass rush wasn't producing. That's a recipe for disaster, especially against a QB like Stafford.

When u continually are asking 4 D line men to beat 5 Olinemen, you will u usually fail more than u wil succeed. That is unless u have Sapp, Booger and Rice. That talent level is hard to duplicate and even that loaded line was susceptible to the run because they were under sized and pass rushers.

[GoColts8818]

On 10/3/2023 at 6:33 PM, Superman said:

 

I'm not a fan of Bradley for the most part. I gave him credit for the gameplan last week, getting aggressive against Lamar. This week, he was mostly back to his usual conservative gameplan. Not a shocker, but disappointing.

 

Still, it helps to acknowledge the circumstances. By the end of the game, we're using replacement players at every level of the defense. We lost a corner (already a thin position), lost a LB, and were limited at DL. And more blitzing probably doesn't help us cover Nacua any better. And the biggest defensive problem in this game, IMO, was the dreadful tackling. It was especially bad in the first quarter, and then it hurt us again in OT. So I don't know if the scheme and the gameplan were the difference in this one. We're not great in coverage, our tackling sucked, and the pass rush wasn't producing. That's a recipe for disaster, especially against a QB like Stafford.

The tacking as a whole this year has been concerning.  Way too many missed tackles.  If the Colts would just clean that up this defense would be a lot better.

[husker61]

Just watched the game. I only saw one bad drop and pierce had a catch with the db holding his arm. It seems to me a lot of people here are seeing what they want to see. I don’t think the receivers are as bad as people are saying, it’s more an inexperienced qb not having the ability to read and make the throw in tight coverage before the receiver  is free. Hopefully he gets there, but you never know. That’s why so any qb’s in college look good, but flop in the nfl.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, husker61 said:

Just watched the game. I only saw one bad drop and pierce had a catch with the db holding his arm. It seems to me a lot of people here are seeing what they want to see. I don’t think the receivers are as bad as people are saying, it’s more an inexperienced qb not having the ability to read and make the throw in tight coverage before the receiver  is free. Hopefully he gets there, but you never know. That’s why so any qb’s in college look good, but flop in the nfl.

I watched the whole game, and I seen at least 4 drops that I can recall. It has been said there were 6, why would the media lie about that when everyone can go back and see for themselves? Have you ever had anything good to say about AR, because if so I haven't seen it.

[husker61]

13 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I watched the whole game, and I seen at least 4 drops that I can recall. It has been said there were 6, why would the media lie about that when everyone can go back and see for themselves? Have you ever had anything good to say about AR, because if so I haven't seen it.

where were the drops, I only saw the wr screen dropped.

[husker61]

The pff thread say only one drop also.

[2006Coltsbestever]

54 minutes ago, husker61 said:

where were the drops, I only saw the wr screen dropped.

Granson had a huge drop at the end of regulation that would have been 1st down around the 38. He catches that, we probably get a few more yards and win it with a FG. I don't know how you don't remember that?

[husker61]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Granson had a huge drop at the end of regulation that would have been 1st down around the 38. He catches that, we probably get a few more yards and win it with a FG. I don't know how you don't remember that?

you mean the one that was thrown behind him and the defender reached back to get a hand in? That would have been a great catch, and shouldn’t be considered a drop!

[2006Coltsbestever]

46 minutes ago, husker61 said:

you mean the one that was thrown behind him and the defender reached back to get a hand in? That would have been a great catch, and shouldn’t be considered a drop!

He hand both hands on it, it should have been caught. A good TE, Or WR would have caught it. It was a little behind him, so you blame AR for Granson not catching that?? Come on now, you are reaching. I also remember Pierce, Moss, and Mckenzie all had drops. All should have been caught. That is the 4 I recall.

[husker61]

21 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

He hand both hands on it, it should have been caught. A good TE, Or WR would have caught it. It was a little behind him, so you blame AR for Granson not catching that?? Come on now, you are reaching. I also remember Pierce, Moss, and Mckenzie all had drops. All should have been caught. That is the 4 I recall.

we will just have to disagree. I don’t think contested passes are drops, you do. Pff seems to agree with me.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, husker61 said:

we will just have to disagree. I don’t think contested passes are drops, you do. Pff seems to agree with me.

We will definitely disagree on this, Kevin Bown, our local media, and even the NFL Network agrees with me that there were actually 6 drops. I just remember 4 clear ones. If a ball hits both your hands, one should catch it. Coaches in peewee football would tell you that. PFF has major flaws. I will end the discussion here because no Matter what I say eventhough almost the whole media agrees with me, you still will believe whatever you want. You are simply wrong here but thanks for the fun discussion.

[throwing BBZ]

3 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

He hand both hands on it, it should have been caught. A good TE, Or WR would have caught it. It was a little behind him, so you blame AR for Granson not catching that?? Come on now, you are reaching. I also remember Pierce, Moss, and Mckenzie all had drops. All should have been caught. That is the 4 I recall.

 

 What you are incapable of understanding is very few would have caught the ball that Granson "dropped". This is a you problem. 

 I base this on body control, defense pressure, timing, velocity, average hands. 

 I do hope we let Granson go after this season. We need better.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 What you are incapable of understanding is very few would have caught the ball that Granson "dropped". This is a you problem. 

 I base this on body control, defense pressure, timing, velocity, average hands. 

 I do hope we let Granson go after this season. We need better.

So you blame AR not Granson for the drop. Ok.