Does SS move on from Bradley this offseason?

[RollerColt]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

I wasn't a fan of hiring Bradley in the first place. I don't like his scheme, or his rigidity. I said before the season started that I could see Bradley being replaced after this season, especially if the defense looks rough. I will admit that Bradley showed a few surprising adjustments at times this season, like the Ravens game, and that was encouraging. But we're still at the bottom of the league in blitz percentage this season, so it's not like he's really changed.

 

That said, I think he should be replaced, and I still think there's a good chance that happens after this season. The fact that the defense has been banged up shouldn't let him off the hook.

I also was pretty bummed about him being hired. He's a great person and human being. I just don't agree with his scheme. That type of defense isn't going to stop anyone in the 2020s. 

[RollerColt]

Shane is being professional in defending his coaches. That's what a leader does. Always compliment publicly, and criticize privately. 

 

I'm sure Ballard is watching intently as the season goes on with this defense. 

[coltsfan_canada]

He might get raise

 

[DougDew]

Can our players defeat the opponent one-on-one?  At what frequency?

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

Shane is being professional in defending his coaches. That's what a leader does. Always compliment publicly, and criticize privately. 

 

I'm sure Ballard is watching intently as the season goes on with this defense. 

 

Steichen is the most boring interview ever. It drives me crazy, but it's probably the right thing to do. I wouldn't expect him to give us anything as a sound bite. It was probably satisfying for Niners fans to hear Kyle Shanahan being open and honest about their bad defensive call last week, but I don't know what that does for chemistry.

 

What I'm more concerned with is how those conversations go behind the scenes, and we'll probably never know about that. I see Steichen getting after it with players on both sides of the ball on the sidelines, so I don't think he's a passive aggressive, non-confrontational kind of guy. 

[RollerColt]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Steichen is the most boring interview ever. It drives me crazy, but it's probably the right thing to do. I wouldn't expect him to give us anything as a sound bite. It was probably satisfying for Niners fans to hear Kyle Shanahan being open and honest about their bad defensive call last week, but I don't know what that does for chemistry.

 

What I'm more concerned with is how those conversations go behind the scenes, and we'll probably never know about that. I see Steichen getting after it with players on both sides of the ball on the sidelines, so I don't think he's a passive aggressive, non-confrontational kind of guy. 

From all of the accounts I've seen, heard, and read: he's very intense and demanding. But yes, he's taciturn in regards to his emotions and how he personally feels about the team. That can lead to fans viewing him as a prevaricator. 

 

He's the anti-Jim Mora in a way. 

 

In the end, I'm not so sure it will be his call to make on Bradley. I think if Bradley is gone, it will be Chris removing him. This is his final chance to keep his job in the eyes of many, so he's not going to squander his opportunity by putting his future in Bradley. 

[Superman]

45 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

From all of the accounts I've seen, heard, and read: he's very intense and demanding. But yes, he's taciturn in regards to his emotions and how he personally feels about the team. That can lead to fans viewing him as a prevaricator. 

 

He's the anti-Jim Mora in a way. 

 

In the end, I'm not so sure it will be his call to make on Bradley. I think if Bradley is gone, it will be Chris removing him. This is his final chance to keep his job in the eyes of many, so he's not going to squander his opportunity by putting his future in Bradley. 

 

Hold on while I look up "taciturn" and "prevaricator."

 

Agreed.

 

I think if Steichen told Ballard 'I don't want Bradley anymore,' Ballard would be on board. It's my opinion that, with Steichen not able to take the job until February, and being a first time HC, everyone decided it would be best to keep Bradley and his staff in place for 2023. One less thing for Steichen to have to worry about in a short time frame, and you can reassess later. But that's entirely supposition on my part.

[Moosejawcolt]

3 hours ago, sb41champs said:

Nope - look at the number of injuries the defense has sustained this season - especially in the defensive backfield.

 

Grover Stewart's suspension too.

 

You can't field a competitive team WITHOUT competent players to field.

Yeah  that Grover is  a real game changer. Its kind of losing luck on defense!!

[Colt.45]

Is it Bradley or is it the available personnel?

[BProland85]

3 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

Is it Bradley or is it the available personnel?

It’s both. It’s not having the personnel at DE to create consistent pressure. It’s the DBs and lack of talent they possess. And it’s also the DC who keeps employing this soft zone scheme which allows guys wide open in the middle. 

[RollerColt]

33 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Hold on while I look up "taciturn" and "prevaricator."

 

Agreed.

 

I think if Steichen told Ballard 'I don't want Bradley anymore,' Ballard would be on board. It's my opinion that, with Steichen not able to take the job until February, and being a first time HC, everyone decided it would be best to keep Bradley and his staff in place for 2023. One less thing for Steichen to have to worry about in a short time frame, and you can reassess later. But that's entirely supposition on my part.

I think that's a fair and reasonable thought for Bradley staying this season. Makes less work for Steichen out of the gate. 

[Derakynn]

Wasn't Schwartz available the same time we were looking for a DC? I remember wanting him when he was available. I know the Colts just kind of shredded his defense but overall wherever he has gone, his defenses seem to have done well.

 

Bradley is getting kinda screwed by all the injuries in the secondary but the defensive philosophy overall is not terribly inspiring and I much prefer a more aggressive defense.

[Colt.45]

13 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

It’s both. It’s not having the personnel at DE to create consistent pressure. It’s the DBs and lack of talent they possess. And it’s also the DC who keeps employing this soft zone scheme which allows guys wide open in the middle. 

It's what the GM wants isnt it? The last guy was same. The cries/complaints go back to the Dungy days.

I'm generalizing of course but the systemic issues seem to come from higher than the DC/HC.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

It's what the GM wants isnt it? The last guy was same. The cries/complaints go back to the Dungy days.

I'm generalizing of course but the systemic issues seem to come from higher than the DC/HC.

I guarantee if they change DC it will be Shane’s decision and his pick in collaboration with Ballard.

[Patrick Miller]

I wish he would move on from him now.

[csmopar]

3 hours ago, richard pallo said:

No doubt in my mind he will be replaced.  The big question will be whether we stick with a 4-3 guy or move to a 3-4 guy.  A change could mean a lot of player turnover on the defensive side.

Stay 4-3 but switch to an attacking man based scheme

3 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I don’t think that matters in todays league. Teams are mixing things up and play both.

Absolutely it matters. Pure 3-4 defenses need studs at OLB to pull off. Those are very hard to find and expensive 

29 minutes ago, Patrick Miller said:

I wish he would move on from him now.

So do I but who takes his place?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

25 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Stay 4-3 but switch to an attacking man based scheme

Absolutely it matters. Pure 3-4 defenses need studs at OLB to pull off. Those are very hard to find and expensive 

So do I but who takes his place?

Teams are playing all kinds of hybrids. No team stays in one or the other all the time. When Lewis got injured last season he got injured dropping back into coverage. Teams mix it up now.

[Zoltan]

I don't see them moving on from Gus, it would be a near impossible job for any DC when you lose two starting CBs to injury and Rodgers who was a projected starter.

[csmopar]

44 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Teams are playing all kinds of hybrids. No team stays in one or the other all the time. When Lewis got injured last season he got injured dropping back into coverage. Teams mix it up now.

That’s why I say 4-3 base

[John Waylon]

I mean I can’t throw all the blame on Bradley. The pass rush is the %s. The corners at this point are the drizzling %s.
 

What exactly does anyone expect from that recipe? 
 

When do we blame the GM who has used 6 picks on edge players in the first three rounds of drafts in the last 7 drafts and this is all the pass rush we’ve got to show for it? He swings and misses like laundry hanging out on the line on a windy day. 
 

Maybe all of these problems we can’t seem to shake are a result of a cumulative issue… 

[indyagent17]

I think Bradley will finish out the season because Steichen does want any more distractions for the team to deal with. We are already reeling after Richardson was lost for the season. As bad as it is more qualified DC will be available after the season. I also feel that Steichen will also be more harsh with him. The tape doesn’t lie 

[jimmy g]

7 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

True statement. @Restinpeacesweetchloe

 

I am hoping the Giants clean house and we can get Don Martindale.

 

2 of the best college DCs I would love to have as Colts DC, would be Glenn Schumann of Georgia or Phil Parker of Iowa. The latter does more with less. Maybe we draft Cooper DeJean of Iowa and pair him up with Phil Parker of Iowa.  

 

 

 

I like Iowa. But I’m a Penn St fan. I’d take Manny Diaz.

[jimmy g]

5 hours ago, RollerColt said:

I also was pretty bummed about him being hired. He's a great person and human being. I just don't agree with his scheme. That type of defense isn't going to stop anyone in the 2020s. 

It’s the type Ballard likes. Plus the kind Eberflus used here.

[Scott Pennock]

I think we go back to the 3-4 and play bump and run with Brents, Jones and Flowers (as the Nickel after Moore walks)...............cut Shaq and use Speed and Franklin as ILB's with Paye and Ebukam as the Rush LB's. Use the money saved from Shaq's release to buy another 3-4 edge rusher.

 

Couldn't be any worse than they are now!??! 

 

LOL

 

[compuls1v3]

9 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, my stance is not necessarily based on recent results. We came into the season intending to test out a bunch of young DBs, and now we're without at least three of them due to injury. The depth was always questionable at best, and now we know it's pretty bad. I don't know what the deal was with Darius Rush, but he's not contributing anywhere else so maybe he had a problem behind the scenes... Maybe he just can't handle it, but we shouldn't be in such bad shape that we're worried about a 5th round draft pick.

 

And yeah, put some of this on Ballard, for the state of the roster, specifically at corner. 

 

I'm still wondering why Ballard seems to be so closely involved on the defensive side. It's supposed to be his vision on defense, and we hire DCs that fit that vision. But he leaves the offense to the HC, and that seems to be by design; he's "hired" three difference HCs, all of them offensive guys. 

 

And I don't mind the baseline idea of this defensive scheme, but you have to be able to rush up front -- we're inconsistent, at best -- and you have to be sound in the back end. For as much as I don't like Bradley, we're having execution problems, not just scheme problems. Brown blew coverages, JuJu was blowing coverages (but had some playmaking ability), Baker was committing penalties... However, Bradley's staff is supposed to be known for coaching up the young guys, and they're not having success with that right now. Even if we DID like the scheme, we still have personnel and coaching problems.

 

Edit: Ballard also apparently came close to hiring Raheem Morris, who would have brought a different defensive philosophy. So I wonder...

I want a new D coach,  and that Iowa coach sounds intriguing, although I'm not sure if it translates to the NFL.  I will say we need an elite pass rusher (we currently have 2 edge setters), we need an LB who can cover (haven't had one since Okereke), and we need a solid corner.   That on D, a true Alpha number 1 WR on O, and we'd be set I think (if AR pans out).

[compuls1v3]

3 hours ago, John Waylon said:

I mean I can’t throw all the blame on Bradley. The pass rush is the %s. The corners at this point are the drizzling %s.
 

What exactly does anyone expect from that recipe? 
 

When do we blame the GM who has used 6 picks on edge players in the first three rounds of drafts in the last 7 drafts and this is all the pass rush we’ve got to show for it? He swings and misses like laundry hanging out on the line on a windy day. 
 

Maybe all of these problems we can’t seem to shake are a result of a cumulative issue… 

I agree, Ballard has missed on DE, but we might have a QB, so hopefully he goes after an elite pass rusher.  I think Paye is the only DE he's picked in the first round,  and it was a late pick.  Also,  Bradley needs to blitz more.  I'd love to see some more corner blitzes and safety blitzes. 

[NewColtsFan]

12 hours ago, twfish said:

I understood why Irsay and Ballard wanted to hold onto Bradley going in with Shane. #1 it gave Shane the ability to focus more on the offense and put a little less on his plate. #2 Gus runs a desired scheme for Ballard. #3 The defense played really well with him initially last year. 

 

However we have seen some truly questionable decision by him, last year the debacle of not starting Rodgers when he was playing his butt off, this year staring Baker JR over Brents to start the season when it wasn't necessary. Too giving up massive leads, historic dating back to Minnesota and now allowing other teams to score on us basically at will. I do fully realize, and acknowledge that he's missing some key pieces however he is okay playing off zone coverage allowing experienced QB's to absolutely shred us and so slow to make adjustments. It's not just this year either, he did it last year as well. His play calling just doesn't work. 

 

Now that Shane is getting established and showing he is going to be a solid coach do you think he will request to bring in his own guy?   

I don’t know how long Bradley’s deal is with the Colts?   Was it one year?   Two years?   I don’t know.   I don’t think the Colts want to be buying out the defensive coaching staff.    So to moving on from Bradley, I’d guess the answer is…. Maybe. 
 

That said, Minshew isn’t terrible.   He has limitations.    A team typically doesn’t plan on the backup starting roughly a dozen games or so.   You hope to only need him for perhaps 4 games and get two wins.   The Colts have been dealt a series of tough luck blows.   Sucks to be us.   But let’s not blame the rest of the season on Minshew.   It’s not his fault.    Honestly. 
 

 

[lollygagger8]

Bradley defense in a nutshell: 

 

3rd and 14: 

 

Don't blitz,

 

Rush 4....and go into prevent zone and leave middle of the field wide open for a 25 yard gain. 

[tfunky14]

Yea fire someone that had the defense ranked 11 in team defense last year. 

You trade away top DB, lose 3 others to injuries, LB just getting back after surgery,  lose a top DL for 5 games and you have the nerve to blame the D coach. 

[Defjamz26]

I’m not a fan of the Bradley scheme either. My biggest issue is how rigid he is as a coach and his philosophies. Like refusing to start Rodgers over Facyson last season and not letting Cross see the field because the responsibilities for the SS in his D are so ridiculously complicated that it takes years to comprehend. He also can not figure out how to take away the team’s best receiver consistently. He stopped Ridley in the 2nd half of the season opener, but then couldn’t figure out Puka Nacua. Nacua is good but you would think a DC with a decade of experience would be able to win that match up. When teams start sitting down in the soft spots of the zone, he does nothing to adjust. There are some positives like the emergence of Speed and Franklin in his system, but outside of how great the LBs are in his scheme, it’s really not great anywhere else. This decision is hopefully a Steichen and Irsay one, because I don’t think Ballard would part ways with him.

[twfish]

59 minutes ago, tfunky14 said:

Yea fire someone that had the defense ranked 11 in team defense last year. 

You trade away top DB, lose 3 others to injuries, LB just getting back after surgery,  lose a top DL for 5 games and you have the nerve to blame the D coach. 

There was plenty to dislike last year still with how he was handling things which is still going on this year. He is incredibly slow to make any sort of adjustments. At the end of the day he wasn't Shane's pick, he was a hold over so that's why the question was poised.

[DougDew]

2 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

Bradley defense in a nutshell: 

 

3rd and 14: 

 

Don't blitz,

 

Rush 4....and go into prevent zone and leave middle of the field wide open for a 25 yard gain. 

Do we ever get coverage sacks?  I see some defenses getting sacks by rushing three defenders because there isn't anybody open for long periods of time.  That's almost always a zone defense because you don't have 8 guys covering 5 receivers man to man.

 

Our guys just suck at covering the middle zones.

[DougDew]

30 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

but you would think a DC with a decade of experience would be able to win that match up.

The DC isn't the one biting on fake moves.

[chad72]

10 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

I think we go back to the 3-4 and play bump and run with Brents, Jones and Flowers (as the Nickel after Moore walks)...............cut Shaq and use Speed and Franklin as ILB's with Paye and Ebukam as the Rush LB's. Use the money saved from Shaq's release to buy another 3-4 edge rusher.

 

Couldn't be any worse than they are now!??! 

 

LOL

 

 

With so many hybrid defenders where LBs are used as safeties and safeties used as LBs, I am thinking that might be a way to go. Both Kwity Paye and Dayo have 33 inch plus arms making them decent candidates for 3-4 DEs/rush LBs. Dayo in fact has 35 inch plus arms making him a better DE candidate than rush LB candidate. Heck, we could even do a 3-3-5 with the same personnel. I do think having more safety like bodies playing LBs is the way to go in the current NFL. 

 

Look at the Bengals, Germaine Pratt and Logan Wilson, 2 stellar LBs in pass coverage, they are used like safeties with them dropping back into passing lanes. Those kinds of players can be found in the draft easily without paying a premium.

 

We don't have to necessarily call it a 3-4 but we should be playing plenty of 3 man fronts, with either a 3-3-5 with 3 safeties or an attacking 3-4 1-gap, like Wade Philips' D, every now and then. If Grover is back as the 3-4 NT that he is suited for in a 1-gap 3-4, Buckner can easily be one of those long armed DEs. You could even draft someone like Brandon Dorlus of Oregon for a Derek Wolfe like role opposite Buckner. 

 

 

[DougDew]

10 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

With so many hybrid defenders where LBs are used as safeties and safeties used as LBs, I am thinking that might be a way to go. Both Kwity Paye and Dayo have 33 inch plus arms making them decent candidates for 3-4 DEs/rush LBs. Dayo in fact has 35 inch plus arms making him a better DE candidate than rush LB candidate. Heck, we could even do a 3-3-5 with the same personnel. I do think having more safety like bodies playing LBs is the way to go in the current NFL. 

 

Look at the Bengals, Germaine Pratt and Logan Wilson, 2 stellar LBs in pass coverage, they are used like safeties with them dropping back into passing lanes. Those kinds of players can be found in the draft easily without paying a premium.

 

We don't have to necessarily call it a 3-4 but we should be playing plenty of 3 man fronts, with either a 3-3-5 with 3 safeties or an attacking 3-4 1-gap, like Wade Philips' D, every now and then. If Grover is back as the 3-4 NT that he is suited for in a 1-gap 3-4, Buckner can easily be one of those long armed DEs. You could even draft someone like Brandon Dorlus of Oregon for a Derek Wolfe like role opposite Buckner. 

 

 

Buckner, Grover, and Dayo would make a pretty good 3 man front.  Dayo might get washed in the run game but I think its easier to beef him up than to slim him down into a 43 edge.

 

I'm kinda with you on the 3-3-5 idea.  Need some new LBs though.

[lollygagger8]

31 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Do we ever get coverage sacks?  I see some defenses getting sacks by rushing three defenders because there isn't anybody open for long periods of time.  That's almost always a zone defense because you don't have 8 guys covering 5 receivers man to man.

 

Our guys just suck at covering the middle zones.

 

We might've had a few the couple of games that Brents was playing. I'd have to re-watch. That zone defense only works if you have guys that can cover. 

 

Unfortunately, when your ILB (Franklin) is your best cover guy, you're going to have problems. 

 

 

I'm also tired of the multi-position/tweener guys Ballard seems to love. Just because you're versatile and can play multiple position across the line, doesn't mean it's a good idea to have a stable full. I would rather have a great DE that's dedicated to that spot than just an ok guy that can move around. 

[DougDew]

5 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

We might've had a few the couple of games that Brents was playing. I'd have to re-watch. That zone defense only works if you have guys that can cover. 

 

Unfortunately, when your ILB (Franklin) is your best cover guy, you're going to have problems. 

 

 

I'm also tired of the multi-position/tweener guys Ballard seems to love. Just because you're versatile and can play multiple position across the line, doesn't mean it's a good idea to have a stable full. I would rather have a great DE that's dedicated to that spot than just an ok guy that can move around. 

RAS and potential is another way of saying they are not ready to play at an NFL level.  I think that's the real problem.

 

The best players Ballard has drafted are still probably Nelson, Leonard, Smith, and Taylor.  All 4 had great production in college for more than one year.

 

Notre Dame, Auburn, Wisconsin.  Leonard was from a small school but he had length and traits for the NFL.

[chad72]

19 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Buckner, Grover, and Dayo would make a pretty good 3 man front.  Dayo might get washed in the run game but I think its easier to beef him up than to slim him down into a 43 edge.

 

I'm kinda with you on the 3-3-5 idea.  Need some new LBs though.

 

Kwity Paye is very good at setting the edge vs the run, so he can be the rush LB that sets the edge. Draft a couple bulky LB/safety combo types and I think we will be set. The high draft picks can be reserved for CBs and WRs, IMO.

[DougDew]

10 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Kwity Paye is very good at setting the edge vs the run, so he can be the rush LB that sets the edge. Draft a couple bulky LB/safety combo types and I think we will be set. The high draft picks can be reserved for CBs and WRs, IMO.

Do we still have JJ Domann?  That was his role in college.

[NorthernColt]

Bradleys defense hasn't been great this year, but its also harder to evaluate, when you play a soft zone coverage defense, but have arguably the worst secondary personnel in the entire NFL right now. Thats supposed to be the strength.