Bradley's D

[NewColtsFan]

7 hours ago, MikeCurtis said:

 

I wouldnt say that ALL of our back 7 are bad

 

We had one LB on the field yesterday that could actually play 

 

Our CBs were getting mauled by the WRs of the Bengals

(This is ANOTHER example of WHY we need a WR1 as Well as Pittman)

 

We NEED a playmaking FS that is not on this team today.....  

 

We NEED an OLB that can make a tackle. - Missing Speed KILLED this defense....

In the offseason, we need to replace SHAQ

 

The WEAK OL from the Bengals stopped our DL with ease We did NOT generate pass rush

Maybe its time that we BUY a DE in FA

We have our QB and LT on contract......  

 

And lastly

 

If you see the defense in an 8 man box...... why run the ball? - Time to Audible

 

JT would have been able to bounce a few of those outside, but of course he didnt play

 

I like the gutsyness of our QB, but will be happy when AR5 is back

 

I don’t think your view of the Bengals OL as weak is accurate at all.  It used to be.  
 

But After the Bengals lost the Super Bowl they invested heavily in the OL.   3 or 4 good vets in free agency and a high draft pick that plays.  Their OL is no longer weak. 

[NewColtsFan]

10 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Bradley has a bunch of bums in his back 7. This kind of results should be Expected. We are Not what some knuckleheads think we should be.

 With Minshews arm teams should always play 8 in the box. Stop our run game and give him his dink and dunks. He is constantly inconsistent and struggles to get all the way to the end zone.

 We are now playing like we were expected to play.

 

“Bradley has a bunch of bums in his back 7…” 

 

Forget for a moment that you’re wrong,  why you think this is appropriate to post is a mystery.   This is the kind of comment that makes me say this franchise needs a better fan base.    The next time you wonder why some players HATE fans, remember this post. 

[Hawkeyecolt]

Gus is playing the cards he was dealt.  He's down Rodgers, Flowers, and Brents  at CB.  He was without Grove for 6 weeks.  Leonard was absolutely ineffective and liability on defense. Speed being out last game didn't help at all.  Other than the Saints game where he had Brown out there I don't have much to complain about with Gus.  There are times where I think he should have blitzed more this season, but to think leaving Brown and Baker on an island with Chase and Higgins was the way to go is wrong to me.  The front four didn't get to the QB.  That was supposed to be an advantage for the Colts vs the Bengals.  

[CoachLite]

Bradley should join Reich in coaching a high school team preferably in another state.

[lollygagger8]

12 hours ago, compuls1v3 said:

I agree that we need to blitz more, especially against 2nd string QBs.  The only comment that I made about blitzing is that it likely wouldn't stop the screens that killed us.  But yes, we need to blitz more.  Elite teams like the Cowboys and Eagles do it, so why shouldn't we?

 

My thing is this: 

 

1) We all know the Colts are 2nd to last in the league in terms of how much they blitz

2) They can't stop screens regardless of blitzing or not (which has been a prob for a way too long) 

 

Stop being scared, and take the chance (a greater chance) at getting to the QB and blitz.

 

Kenny Moore is amazing at CB blitzing. He is on the smaller side and gets lost in the pile and his "bend" is fantastic....Use him! 

Send the LB Speed, he's super fast

I don't remember ever seeing Gus send a safety to blitz cuz he's so scared of getting beat over the top. (which happens anyway) 

 

I just don't get it. It's super frustrating to watch.  

[jemack]

Receivers find an opening so easily in this zone. Defenders 10ft from the reception. No wonder the defense can't get off the field. It's one tier above a 2 minute prevent. It's painful to watch.

It's painful writing this...

[Moosejawcolt]

This style of defense is totally based on the front 4. You don't have the front 4 to apply constant pressure and it doesnt  matter if you have Deion Sanders back there. We are running a defense and Gus does not have the talent to run it. You could have marginal CB play and if you had a very good front 4, it would all look much better. Ballard has not provided Gus, and i am no fan of Gus, so it is a mute point to call out Gus' play calling. People call for more blitzing and if you really pay attention to games, it has failed. It leaves these below average corners on an island and the front 4 doesn't get pressure and then a big play happens. Gus is not a stupid play caller. He knows that his front 4 is  not getting pressure, and therefore, there are huge holes in the zones. He knows if he blitzes and they dont get through, it will usually lead to a big play. L.ike I said, I may not be a fan of his but the failure of this defense is more due to talent than play calling. I keep saying it that to run this defence, you better have studs up front to apply pressure. This D line is average if that. Dont be fooled by the up tick in sacks.  

[RollerColt]

16 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I don’t think your view of the Bengals OL as weak is accurate at all.  It used to be.  
 

But After the Bengals lost the Super Bowl they invested heavily in the OL.   3 or 4 good vets in free agency and a high draft pick that plays.  Their OL is no longer weak. 

Yep. They spent significant resources on the trenches this past season for both sides of the ball. What we’re seeing is that construction now coming into fruition. 

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

This style of defense is totally based on the front 4. You don't have the front 4 to apply constant pressure and it doesnt  matter if you have Deion Sanders back there. We are running a defense and Gus does not have the talent to run it. You could have marginal CB play and if you had a very good front 4, it would all look much better. Ballard has not provided Gus, and i am no fan of Gus, so it is a mute point to call out Gus' play calling. People call for more blitzing and if you really pay attention to games, it has failed. It leaves these below average corners on an island and the front 4 doesn't get pressure and then a big play happens. Gus is not a stupid play caller. He knows that his front 4 is  not getting pressure, and therefore, there are huge holes in the zones. He knows if he blitzes and they dont get through, it will usually lead to a big play. L.ike I said, I may not be a fan of his but the failure of this defense is more due to talent than play calling. I keep saying it that to run this defence, you better have studs up front to apply pressure. This D line is average if that. Dont be fooled by the up tick in sacks.  

So….  It would seem pretty clear, you are very much in the camp if everything that is wrong with this team can clearly be blamed on Chris Ballard.   
 

Fine, that’s your view.   
 

But in the future, when I call you a Ballard-hater, please don’t respond with….   What?  Me?   Hate Ballard?   No, not me!  
 

Let’s try to be on the same page about things that are obvious.  

[Old Colt]

12 hours ago, Hawkeyecolt said:

Gus is playing the cards he was dealt.  He's down Rodgers, Flowers, and Brents  at CB.  He was without Grove for 6 weeks.  Leonard was absolutely ineffective and liability on defense. Speed being out last game didn't help at all.  Other than the Saints game where he had Brown out there I don't have much to complain about with Gus.  There are times where I think he should have blitzed more this season, but to think leaving Brown and Baker on an island with Chase and Higgins was the way to go is wrong to me.  The front four didn't get to the QB.  That was supposed to be an advantage for the Colts vs the Bengals.  

Bradley has played Bend But Don't Break every year.  Problem is they constantly BREAK.

 

and with the problems you mention with the DB's, you can't let them just sit out there and expect them to cover with no pressure or games to blitz or get consistent pressure.  Colts have needed a new defensive direction for years.  

[BeanDiasucci]

42 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

So….  It would seem pretty clear, you are very much in the camp if everything that is wrong with this team can clearly be blamed on Chris Ballard.   
 

Fine, that’s your view.   
 

But in the future, when I call you a Ballard-hater, please don’t respond with….   What?  Me?   Hate Ballard?   No, not me!  
 

Let’s try to be on the same page about things that are obvious.  

OK, so per you in this thread, posters aren't allowed to criticize players or the players may hate them. And posters aren't allowed to criticize Ballard or you will call them Ballard haters. You seem to position yourself as a mature voice of reason here but isn't this whole, "You're a hater. You're a hater" thing a grade C middle school jab? 

[richard pallo]

7 hours ago, jemack said:

Receivers find an opening so easily in this zone. Defenders 10ft from the reception. No wonder the defense can't get off the field. It's one tier above a 2 minute prevent. It's painful to watch.

It's painful writing this...

It’s on the players really.  The secondary is young and learning on the fly.  The scheme works throughout the league.  Our guys are still learning how to execute and to read and react correctly.

49 minutes ago, Old Colt said:

Bradley has played Bend But Don't Break every year.  Problem is they constantly BREAK.

 

and with the problems you mention with the DB's, you can't let them just sit out there and expect them to cover with no pressure or games to blitz or get consistent pressure.  Colts have needed a new defensive direction for years.  

We don’t need a new direction.  We just need better execution and an upgrade at a few positions.  Playing rookies and inexperienced players results in a big learning curve.

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, BeanDiasucci said:

OK, so per you in this thread, posters aren't allowed to criticize players or the players may hate them. And posters aren't allowed to criticize Ballard or you will call them Ballard haters. You seem to position yourself as a mature voice of reason here but isn't this whole, "You're a hater. You're a hater" thing a grade C middle school jab? 

I’ve never said people aren’t allowed.   Never.   People are allowed to do whatever they want.   
 

And do you really want to defend someone who calls Colts players, “Bums”.   Really?     Fine, go right ahead.   Not for me.   I think it’s a repugnant thing to do.  

[RollerColt]

4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I’ve never said people aren’t allowed.   Never.   People are allowed to do whatever they want.   
 

And do you really want to defend someone who calls Colts players, “Bums”.   Really?     Fine, go right ahead.   Not for me.   I think it’s a repugnant thing to do.  

I don’t think I’ve ever looked at our players and went “that guy’s a bum”. Maybe thought out loud for someone being stupid for doing something stupid, but not a bum in the sense that they flat out suck. 
 

And that’s probably because a lot of us know what it feels like to get hit… and if it feels like that in high school and college… sheesh… I can only imagine what it’s like against world class athletes… every weekend…

 

Excuse me while I go ice my old bruises…

[Superman]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

The scheme works throughout the league.

 

There is no good defensive team that does what the Colts do.

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, BeanDiasucci said:

OK, so per you in this thread, posters aren't allowed to criticize players or the players may hate them. And posters aren't allowed to criticize Ballard or you will call them Ballard haters. You seem to position yourself as a mature voice of reason here but isn't this whole, "You're a hater. You're a hater" thing a grade C middle school jab? 

You’ve done a nice job if twisting my words.   For the most part I don’t have a problem with Ballard-haters.   I disagree, but I don’t try to change their mind anymore.   I used to, but not after last year.  
 

My problem is with people who are clearly haters, but don’t own it.  They hide behind “what me?  No, not me!”   They won’t own their own position.   And there are still a handful of those types.  
 

Im not some mature voice of reason.  But im willing to defend my positions.  I took an unpopular position yesterday.   I took a lot of pushback.   I’m willing to defend myself and my views.   So if you take an unpopular opinion, then be willing to defend yourself.  That’s all I’m saying. 
 

Everyone here is free to say whatever they want.   That’s always been my position. 

[NewColtsFan]

35 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

There is no good defensive team that does what the Colts do.

Is this opinion or fact?   

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

James Boyd on his podcast today said after watching film it was clear why all the screen passes had huge yards. Bengals sent Higgins and chase down field taking defenders downfield with them leaving the screen passes wide open.

 

Here is my biggest question. This wasn’t burrow. Wouldn’t you rather take the chances with a inexperienced backup trying to throwing downfield then giving him easy screen passes?

[Superman]

15 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Is this opinion or fact?   

 

It's based on my interpretation of what the Colts do, and what metrics I use to determine whether a defense is "good" or not. But I think the numbers speak for themselves.

 

The Colts play Cover 3 on 57% of defensive snaps this season. The Panthers are the only other team that plays Cover 3 on more than 50% of snaps (and the Panthers are decidedly not a good defense). No other team plays more than 46% of any specific coverage. No "good defense" plays more than 42% of any specific coverage, and no "good defense" plays more than 40% Cover 3.

 

The Colts are one of four teams that blitz less than 20% of pass plays -- Niners, Jets, Dolphins are the other three. Dolphins are above average, Niners and Jets are really good/great defenses. But all three of those teams play significantly more man coverage than the Colts. I can't find the man/zone splits at the moment, but last time I saw them the Colts were at the bottom of the list, and those other three teams were on the upper end. It's somewhat reflected in the Cover 0 and Cover 1 stats in the previous link. So out of teams that most diligently rely on the front four to generate pressure, the Colts are an outlier in their virtual exclusion of man coverage. The Colts also have a lower pressure rate than those other three teams.

 

So the Colts are almost entirely a four man rush, zone based defense, and they play one specific coverage more than half the time. There's no good defense that can be described this way.

[richard pallo]

15 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It's based on my interpretation of what the Colts do, and what metrics I use to determine whether a defense is "good" or not. But I think the numbers speak for themselves.

 

The Colts play Cover 3 on 57% of defensive snaps this season. The Panthers are the only other team that plays Cover 3 on more than 50% of snaps (and the Panthers are decidedly not a good defense). No other team plays more than 46% of any specific coverage. No "good defense" plays more than 42% of any specific coverage, and no "good defense" plays more than 40% Cover 3.

 

The Colts are one of four teams that blitz less than 20% of pass plays -- Niners, Jets, Dolphins are the other three. Dolphins are above average, Niners and Jets are really good/great defenses. But all three of those teams play significantly more man coverage than the Colts. I can't find the man/zone splits at the moment, but last time I saw them the Colts were at the bottom of the list, and those other three teams were on the upper end. It's somewhat reflected in the Cover 0 and Cover 1 stats in the previous link. So out of teams that most diligently rely on the front four to generate pressure, the Colts are an outlier in their virtual exclusion of man coverage. The Colts also have a lower pressure rate than those other three teams.

 

So the Colts are almost entirely a four man rush, zone based defense, and they play one specific coverage more than half the time. There's no good defense that can be described this way.

So this reads like a coach using the players he currently has available to him as best he can with the defense he prefers.  So he’s trying to use the strengths of the players he has along with trying to best help out the players with weaknesses and inexperience by trying to put them where they will not be exposed to a great extent.  He has massaged his defense to fit the players and circumstances that he has been charged with.  I think that’s what good coaches do.  Don’t force anything on a player if he is not ready to handle it.  And if circumstances force you to play someone try to help them as much as possible.

[Dingus McGirt]

8 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

This style of defense is totally based on the front 4. You don't have the front 4 to apply constant pressure and it doesnt  matter if you have Deion Sanders back there. We are running a defense and Gus does not have the talent to run it. You could have marginal CB play and if you had a very good front 4, it would all look much better. Ballard has not provided Gus, and i am no fan of Gus, so it is a moot point to call out Gus' play calling. People call for more blitzing and if you really pay attention to games, it has failed. It leaves these below average corners on an island and the front 4 doesn't get pressure and then a big play happens. Gus is not a stupid play caller. He knows that his front 4 is  not getting pressure, and therefore, there are huge holes in the zones. He knows if he blitzes and they dont get through, it will usually lead to a big play. L.ike I said, I may not be a fan of his but the failure of this defense is more due to talent than play calling. I keep saying it that to run this defence, you better have studs up front to apply pressure. This D line is average if that. Dont be fooled by the up tick in sacks.  

“moot“

[AKB]

is small

[Superman]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

So this reads like a coach using the players he currently has available to him as best he can with the defense he prefers.  So he’s trying to use the strengths of the players he has along with trying to best help out the players with weaknesses and inexperience by trying to put them where they will not be exposed to a great extent.  He has massaged his defense to fit the players and circumstances that he has been charged with.  I think that’s what good coaches do.  Don’t force anything on a player if he is not ready to handle it.  And if circumstances force you to play someone try to help them as much as possible.

 

That's a gracious take. It doesn't work for me though. First, this is what Gus Bradley does no matter what personnel he has, no matter what team he's with. So saying that he's massaged his defense to fit the players and circumstances is probably less accurate than saying that he does the same thing every year for the last decade. 

 

Second, while I understand that one of the advantages of this scheme is supposed to be that it's easier for young players to do their jobs, one of the main features is supposed to be that you don't give up explosive plays. The Colts get burned more than a super conservative defense should. So we don't get the benefit of the conservative defense, yet we still endure the high completion percentages, 3rd down struggles, red zone struggles, etc. So what are we really getting from this?

 

Also, the most aggressive game plan of the year so far was the Ravens game. Lots of credit to Bradley for being flexible in that game. We somehow were able to be more aggressive with pressures and more diverse with coverages, and didn't get exposed with blown assignments. Why is every wrinkle from that game plan now archived and untouched for the last three months?

 

I know there are personnel challenges, and the secondary is young. But Bradley's scheme is too vanilla to produce good results in the modern NFL.  

[Boondoggle]

Never have liked Bradley and didn't like the hire.  Guy has never distinguished himself so it is no surprise to see what his end product is in Indy.  And I have to agree that running 57% Cover 3 in today's league is crazy.

 

There is something to be said for zigging when everyone else is zagging.  But in Bradley's case it is simply his comfort zone.

 

Anyway.  Looking ahead the Colts need to be ready to pounce on one of the DCs who get fired from their head coaching positions:

 

Brandon Staley will be fired by the Chargers, he is a college coach of the Fangio tree who put up a top defense in LA before the Chargers hired him as HC.

 

Sean McDermott if the Bills let him go would be excellent as well, and may not get another HC gig if he's let go.  He is very plugged in on league trends and when he bounces back to a DC role some team is going to benefit.

 

Todd Bowles will likely be fired in Tampa, and is another guy who was in over his head as a HC but who has shown an ability to coordinate top defenses in big games.

 

Mike Vrabel might not be recycled back to the DC ranks when he gets fired, much like McDermott, but if he does end up as a DC he will be a very strong hire.

 

There are others who I think are lesser coordinators but who are still improvements over Bradley.  Like Dennis Allen for example, who I waffle on a bit but will admit might be underrated.  And coaches let go on the staffs of the coaches who are fired as well of course.  But the Colts need to prioritize nailing one of these guys and upgrading their staff.  Doing that and pairing one of them with an offensive mind they have in the HC role would be a winning combo for sure.

[Hawkeyecolt]

6 hours ago, Superman said:

 

It's based on my interpretation of what the Colts do, and what metrics I use to determine whether a defense is "good" or not. But I think the numbers speak for themselves.

 

The Colts play Cover 3 on 57% of defensive snaps this season. The Panthers are the only other team that plays Cover 3 on more than 50% of snaps (and the Panthers are decidedly not a good defense). No other team plays more than 46% of any specific coverage. No "good defense" plays more than 42% of any specific coverage, and no "good defense" plays more than 40% Cover 3.

 

The Colts are one of four teams that blitz less than 20% of pass plays -- Niners, Jets, Dolphins are the other three. Dolphins are above average, Niners and Jets are really good/great defenses. But all three of those teams play significantly more man coverage than the Colts. I can't find the man/zone splits at the moment, but last time I saw them the Colts were at the bottom of the list, and those other three teams were on the upper end. It's somewhat reflected in the Cover 0 and Cover 1 stats in the previous link. So out of teams that most diligently rely on the front four to generate pressure, the Colts are an outlier in their virtual exclusion of man coverage. The Colts also have a lower pressure rate than those other three teams.

 

So the Colts are almost entirely a four man rush, zone based defense, and they play one specific coverage more than half the time. There's no good defense that can be described this way.

Do you have those numbers post New Orleans game?  It is my understanding that he’s been in Cover 3 much less since that game. 

[OLD FAN MAN]

On 12/11/2023 at 10:22 PM, NewColtsFan said:

I don’t think your view of the Bengals OL as weak is accurate at all.  It used to be.  
 

But After the Bengals lost the Super Bowl they invested heavily in the OL.   3 or 4 good vets in free agency and a high draft pick that plays.  Their OL is no longer weak. 

ballard should do the same for the colts lines instead of just depending on his draft picks

[NewColtsFan]

2 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

ballard should do the same for the colts lines instead of just depending on his draft picks

We will see what happens this coming free agent period which starts in mid-March.  

Maybe he will.  

[OLD FAN MAN]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

We will see what happens this coming free agent period which starts in mid-March.  

Maybe he will.  

he said he is seeing more what he needs to do

[Old Colt]

17 hours ago, richard pallo said:

It’s on the players really.  The secondary is young and learning on the fly.  The scheme works throughout the league.  Our guys are still learning how to execute and to read and react correctly.

We don’t need a new direction.  We just need better execution and an upgrade at a few positions.  Playing rookies and inexperienced players results in a big learning curve.

and What is Bradley's excuse for the past years when his defense was sad....  we have some superior players, enough that if  schemed other than Bend but Don't Break , we would be better.  

[chad72]

Our D is middle of the road. They beat up on bad teams, fare well against middle of the road offenses but when they face a balanced offense, they have issues containing them.

 

Jaguars, Browns, Saints - they give up 37, 39 and 27 (Saints were very healthy then and we weren't on the secondary with their speedster Shaheed healthy).

 

Panthers, Patriots, Bucs - they give 13, 6 and 20

 

Titans - they gave up 28 points, Bengals - they gave up 34 points

 

 

Based on the above, we should limit the Steelers to 20 points or less since they are a tier lower than the Bucs w.r.t offense but slightly better than the Bucs on D. The question will be, will we score more than 20? If we do, we win, IMO.

 

That is why I predict a 23-20 Colts win.

 

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Bradley's defense is one thing that has drove me nuts all year. One week we look fantastic, and his D is great, then the next week we stink. It is enough to drive anyone up the wall. You never know week to week how our D is going to perform. Scary.

[jemack]

Definitely take the under for this game...

[Superman]

10 hours ago, Hawkeyecolt said:

Do you have those numbers post New Orleans game?  It is my understanding that he’s been in Cover 3 much less since that game. 

 

Not at the moment. There's been more Cover 4 lately, but I don't think that really changes anything. Cover 4 is even more conservative than Cover 3, and we don't disguise it because the outside corners play further back.

 

Since the Saints, we played Bryce Young and Mac Jones, and had good results. The defense wasn't as good against Baker Mayfield, and even Will Levis got some big plays against us, but the pass rush was still working. Then the Bengals pretty much sliced up the pass defense, and we couldn't pressure the QB.

[FanFromtheWasteland]

On 12/10/2023 at 9:13 PM, bleed blue4life said:

Anyone else tired of this bend but do not break approach on defense? Never sends more than 4 after the qb.Drives me crazy.We are playing back up qb's.Put some pressure on em

I hated it when Dungy ran it

[jvan1973]

On 12/10/2023 at 9:59 PM, IndySouthsider said:

It’s a style that isn’t effective in the current NFL.

A lot of teams run cover 3.  It's pretty prevalent 

[RollerColt]

On 12/12/2023 at 7:02 PM, Superman said:

 

It's based on my interpretation of what the Colts do, and what metrics I use to determine whether a defense is "good" or not. But I think the numbers speak for themselves.

 

The Colts play Cover 3 on 57% of defensive snaps this season. The Panthers are the only other team that plays Cover 3 on more than 50% of snaps (and the Panthers are decidedly not a good defense). No other team plays more than 46% of any specific coverage. No "good defense" plays more than 42% of any specific coverage, and no "good defense" plays more than 40% Cover 3.

 

The Colts are one of four teams that blitz less than 20% of pass plays -- Niners, Jets, Dolphins are the other three. Dolphins are above average, Niners and Jets are really good/great defenses. But all three of those teams play significantly more man coverage than the Colts. I can't find the man/zone splits at the moment, but last time I saw them the Colts were at the bottom of the list, and those other three teams were on the upper end. It's somewhat reflected in the Cover 0 and Cover 1 stats in the previous link. So out of teams that most diligently rely on the front four to generate pressure, the Colts are an outlier in their virtual exclusion of man coverage. The Colts also have a lower pressure rate than those other three teams.

 

So the Colts are almost entirely a four man rush, zone based defense, and they play one specific coverage more than half the time. There's no good defense that can be described this way.

Pretty easy to game plan against. No disguised coverages against rookie QBs who would be the best ones to try it against… 

 

57%… Pretty much any NFL level QB is going to be able to read that. 

[throwing BBZ]

 

 We are a mess talent wise with our back seven. I could see us having 5 different starters next season. I hope so.

 Steichen will have more influence next year with how we choose to defend.

  And he will expect $$ spent in FA for a stud or two for his D. 

[Smonroe]

3 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 We are a mess talent wise with our back seven. I could see us having 5 different starters next season. I hope so.

 Steichen will have more influence next year with how we choose to defend.

  And he will expect $$ spent in FA for a stud or two for his D. 

Right.  Ballard is always a big spender when it comes to bringing in FAs!  
 

But, to be fair - He made Gay the highest kicker in the league, and it was a good signing IMHO.

 

I think our safety group is decent.  If Brents and amines develop, there’s potential.  

[John Hammonds]

On 12/13/2023 at 12:21 PM, Superman said:

 

Not at the moment. There's been more Cover 4 lately, but I don't think that really changes anything. Cover 4 is even more conservative than Cover 3, and we don't disguise it because the outside corners play further back.

 

Since the Saints, we played Bryce Young and Mac Jones, and had good results. The defense wasn't as good against Baker Mayfield, and even Will Levis got some big plays against us, but the pass rush was still working. Then the Bengals pretty much sliced up the pass defense, and we couldn't pressure the QB.

Just for reference -- it looks like those involved in this discussion read the article by Zach Hicks in Sports Illustrated back in mid-November, regarding Gus Bradley's usage of, and departure from, his Cover-3 defense this year.

Here is the article, for those who have not read it.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/colts/news/gus-bradley-coverage-scheme-indianapolis-colts

 

 

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

Just for reference -- it looks like those involved in this discussion read the article by Zach Hicks in Sports Illustrated back in mid-November, regarding Gus Bradley's usage of, and departure from, his Cover-3 defense this year.

Here is the article, for those who have not read it.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/colts/news/gus-bradley-coverage-scheme-indianapolis-colts

 

 

Yup, I just looked back at that article yesterday. And I think the Colts defense got more of a boost from playing the Panthers and Patriots than it did from using more Cover 4.

 

I've also mentioned a few times that I think Jaylon Jones blew his assignment on one of the Mike Evans' TDs (the week after this article came out). The called defense was likely either Cover 4 Quarters -- which Bradley was using a lot more of at the time -- or Cover 6 / Quarter Quarter Half, which is a hybrid of Cover 3 and Cover 4. If it was Cover 4, then Jones should have dropped deep to cover his quarter, but he stayed shallow.

 

If the call was Cover 6, then it was the safety Rodney Thomas who didn't play his assignment right. But in that case, it highlights one of the ways to attack Cover 6, and illustrates the value of disguising coverages at the snap.

 

No defense is perfect, of course. My issue with Bradley is that he's both predictable and conservative, and no matter what personnel we have, I don't think his approach works to produce a top level defense.