Gus Bradley likely staying

[1959Colts]

25 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Yep. He probably is. Just saying him and Ballard have not talked yet about offseason moves and charges. 

...and although Ballard's annual press conference will give us something to watch and comment on.

It will just be a bunch of the usual, predictable, rhetoric. How proud he is of the team, how they hung tough, and fought hard, through all the adversity they faced... blah blah.

Giving Bradley another year, means we have to expect the same frustrating scheme again next year. Allowing the QB too much time, to find the wide open receivers... where they allow third down and long to be simply converted over and over, etc.

The true test will come in this off season. Which of our FA players does Ballard re-sign? Who does he let go?

What new FAs does he acquire? and who does he draft?  our division is now looking much tougher, and these decisions need to be right, in order for us to stay in the hunt with our rivals in the AFC South.  and faced with the upcoming, difficult, schedule, trying to best our 2023 record (of 9-8) becomes even more challenging.

[JediXMan]

Hopefully things change I don’t see how you can finish 28th in PPG on D and think that’s decent enough not to look for a better replacement than Gus.

[stitches]

BTW @Superman can you think of a coach who actually runs a similar defense but hits the points you want a new DC to hit - more disguises, more variety in coverage, more press and less fear of getting beat deep? 

 

I don't think it's easy to find this one and the reason is - the foundation of those type of defenses(rush 4, zone heavy) is aimed precisely at not allowing big plays downfield. 

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

The big problem is that both Ballard and Gus(and whoever else Ballard decides to hire) will rush with 4, play zone heavy and practically never blitz(and that type of scheme is severely dependent on the front 4 being able to disrupt the pass, because you are not disrupting it with the secondary). We were one of the least blitzing teams with Eberflus and we continue on this trend now with Gus.

...

Remember when the Giants DC interviewed for us and after that he said something to the effect that the Colts didn't seem like they wanted to give him the freedom to run schematically what he wants. IMO this is precisely the root of the problem - it's not Gus or Eberflus or whoever else we hire. It's Ballard who wants that defense. 

 

I don't know about this. First, everyone talks about blitzing, and I think that's just a symptom of the conservative and uninventive minds of Eberflus and Bradley. 

 

For example, my biggest smoking gun for why Eberflus needed to go was the way we defended Lamar Jackson. He destroyed us twice in a row, and we did nothing different. Then we play the Ravens this year, and Bradley called the defense like he was possessed with the spirit of Brian Flores -- maybe because Flores is the most high profile defensive coach to fluster Lamar with heavy blitzing. Bradley showed a willingness to step outside of his comfort zone, and it worked. I'm certain he did this with the blessing of the HC, and I'm certain he didn't get a phone call from the GM telling him to never blitz that much again.

 

I'm not asking for someone who will blitz a lot. I'm asking for someone who will adjust their approach from game to game, and play to play, based on the situation. I don't expect anyone to come in and go Brian Flores all season. I just want someone who makes adjustments within the zone based, four man rush scheme.

 

Quote

I think we probably can be better defense with this scheme... but again... we need better talent. We need better pass-rush to begin with and we need better and more consistent secondary. And on bringing in someone who isn't so afraid to get beat deep - I think it's probably one of Ballard's philosophical principles - one of the priorities for his defense he sees is not giving up big plays. 

 

To be clear, my point is that it's not acceptable to play like you're afraid of getting beat deep, while also getting beat deep. First play of the game Saturday night, we give up a 75 yard TD. It's unacceptable, when the underlying philosophy of your entire defense is 'don't give up explosive plays.' And I don't think that's a talent issue. The Texans exploited our defensive philosophy perfectly, and even if we don't give up the huge TD, that's probably still a successful play because they would have had another open receiver for a first down. 

[1959Colts]

Bradley segment begins at 4:37 minute mark

[GoColts8818]

I think some are still looking for signs of what they want to happen rather than listening to Shane telling you what’s going to happen.  For the record I don't want Gus back either but Shane all but told you he’s coming back.

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't know about this. First, everyone talks about blitzing, and I think that's just a symptom of the conservative and uninventive minds of Eberflus and Bradley. 

 

For example, my biggest smoking gun for why Eberflus needed to go was the way we defended Lamar Jackson. He destroyed us twice in a row, and we did nothing different. Then we play the Ravens this year, and Bradley called the defense like he was possessed with the spirit of Brian Flores -- maybe because Flores is the most high profile defensive coach to fluster Lamar with heavy blitzing. Bradley showed a willingness to step outside of his comfort zone, and it worked. I'm certain he did this with the blessing of the HC, and I'm certain he didn't get a phone call from the GM telling him to never blitz that much again.

 

I'm not asking for someone who will blitz a lot. I'm asking for someone who will adjust their approach from game to game, and play to play, based on the situation. I don't expect anyone to come in and go Brian Flores all season. I just want someone who makes adjustments within the zone based, four man rush scheme.

 

 

To be clear, my point is that it's not acceptable to play like you're afraid of getting beat deep, while also getting beat deep. First play of the game Saturday night, we give up a 75 yard TD. It's unacceptable, when the underlying philosophy of your entire defense is 'don't give up explosive plays.' And I don't think that's a talent issue. The Texans exploited our defensive philosophy perfectly, and even if we don't give up the huge TD, that's probably still a successful play because they would have had another open receiver for a first down. 

I think we want the same thing(if we cannot have the even better option - different defensive scheme altogether). I just don't think this is what Ballard wants and will allow. Thus, I don't think the biggest problem is with Gus or whoever the current DC under Ballard is... they will all run that type of D with the same pet peeves we all hate. 

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, stitches said:

BTW @Superman can you think of a coach who actually runs a similar defense but hits the points you want a new DC to hit - more disguises, more variety in coverage, more press and less fear of getting beat deep? 

 

I don't think it's easy to find this one and the reason is - the foundation of those type of defenses(rush 4, zone heavy) is aimed precisely at not allowing big plays downfield. 

 

The Falcons are a 4-3 zone defense. I think what their new DC did in one season is a testament to what a fresh approach can bring for a team like the Colts.

[KB]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

To be clear, my point is that it's not acceptable to play like you're afraid of getting beat deep, while also getting beat deep. First play of the game Saturday night, we give up a 75 yard TD. It's unacceptable, when the underlying philosophy of your entire defense is 'don't give up explosive plays.' And I don't think that's a talent issue. The Texans exploited our defensive philosophy perfectly, and even if we don't give up the huge TD, that's probably still a successful play because they would have had another open receiver for a first down. 

I mentioned in a post a few pages back about that play. To me it seemed Cross should of dropped but he had to pay attention to the TE heading towards his zone. Our LB (couldn't say who) was on that TE like glue throughout the route. Was this a scheme issue, did they just draw up a good play against our zone, or was it an execution error on Cross's part? I think it was an execution error. Could also he called a poor choice I guess.

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

I think we want the same thing(if we cannot have the even better option - different defensive scheme altogether). I just don't think this is what Ballard wants and will allow. Thus, I don't think the biggest problem is with Gus or whoever the current DC under Ballard is... they will all run that type of D with the same pet peeves we all hate. 

 

I don't know. I want the Gus Bradley that gameplanned for the Ravens. That doesn't mean I want the Ravens gameplan every week, just that I want the guy who will make common sense adjustments based on the opponent. Ballard signed off on that guy, and I highly doubt that Ballard told Gus to dial it back after that game.

 

To me, that game is proof that Gus has some freedom to be more flexible. But this is a DC who has been super conservative and rigid for his entire time in the NFL. I agree that he fits Ballard's vision for the defense, but I'm not sure that he doesn't have the freedom to make adjustments week to week, play to play. 

[Old Colt]

Oh well,....  Maybe 2025 we will get a real Defensive Coordinator...  Just hope Gus doesn't cost Shane his job for misplaced belief and Loyalty....  AR will have to walk on water to cover for the Bend and Break Defense of Bradley's.   

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, KB said:

I mentioned in a post a few pages back about that play. To me it seemed Cross should of dropped but he had to pay attention to the TE heading towards his zone. Our LB (couldn't say who) was on that TE like glue throughout the route. Was this a scheme issue, did they just draw up a good play against our zone, or was it an execution error on Cross's part? I think it was an execution error. Could also he called a poor choice I guess.

 

Could be either of those. But if Cross drops deep, we still give up a nice chunk to the TE. Schematically, don't stop good QBs, we just let them complete passes with little resistance. 

[stitches]

This might be a hot take but...I kind of feel like we might need to add a LB to this team... 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Just now, stitches said:

This might be a hot take but...I kind of feel like we need a LB. 

Yep. I hate to say this but franklins tackling was so bad. When you have late round picks in starting positions they are usually inconsistent.  One week they are great. The next week they are bad. They can fill in short term but if you ask them to be a starter they show why they are a backup.  I do like speed though. You can do a lot with him and he has actually won some games in the end for the team.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, stitches said:

This might be a hot take but...I kind of feel like we might need to add a LB to this team... 

 

LOL, not a hot take at all. I thought we were in trouble depth-wise before the season started, because we were relying on Leonard and didn't know if he was healthy. We let him go, and converted a safety to LB. It's one of the thinnest positions on the roster, and poor tackling was one of the biggest problems with the defense all season.

[1959Colts]

11 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Yep. I hate to say this but franklins tackling was so bad. When you have late round picks in starting positions they are usually inconsistent.  One week they are great. The next week they are bad. They can fill in short term but if you ask them to be a starter they show why they are a backup.  I do like speed though. You can do a lot with him and he has actually won some games in the end for the team.

And after Franklin and Speed it really drops off. Olubi, Harrison, Stuard and the lot, all played at backup levels at best.

[Moosejawcolt]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

I don't think a shutdown corner changes our defense if we're playing Cover 3 and Cover 4 almost exclusively, with virtually no pre-snap disguise. It's almost a waste of resources.

 

And while we keep talking about "scheme," some specificity would be good. Ballard wants a zone based defense that can get consistent pressure with a four man rush, while limiting big plays. (With Gus, we have a zone based defense. We don't get consistent pressure, and we don't limit big plays. So one out of three on that mandate, IMO.) I don't know that Ballard wants a defense that only plays two coverages and never disguises, and that's my main problem with Gus. We can probably get better pass rush with some improvement up front, but if we're playing Cover 3 and Cover 4 70% of the time, we're still going to get picked apart by good QBs. Did we contest a single pass against Houston??

 

I think we can be a top ten defense even if we're zone based, four man rush, without a traditional shutdown corner. But we need to play more coverages, we need some disguise, and we need to allow our DBs to play closer to the line of scrimmage more often. (We also need better pass rush, and better tackling, but that's more about personnel than scheme, IMO.) I think there's room for more blitzing also, but there are games where Bradley brings extra pressure, so I think maybe there's something to work with there. That's what I mean by scheme. We're not going to hire anyone who runs 50% man coverage, or who blitzes 30% of the time. What I want is someone who isn't simultaneously so afraid of being beat deep that he runs the most conservative defense in the league, while also getting beat deep two or three times a game.

Totally agree with you and Gus has done the same thing all year and nothing has changed since he has come to Indy. I really do believe that Gus has been hampered   by the lack of talent on the defensive side of the ball. You really think that Steichen saw how the defense played and I cannot believe he was happy with the play calling. Thats why, honestly, I am perplexed by the vote of confidence.  I don't think it is the end of the story. Maybe Steichen brings in a younger guy and makes him an assistant.   I don't think it is the end of the story  and if it is,  I honestly don't see a lot of difference next year and my view of Steichen, not that it matters, takes a hit  The Colts will most likely be playing a tougher schedule with  more efficient qbs next year. Based on the talent and coaching,  I would honestly expect a further regression.

 

[Zoltan]

5 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Disappointed but not surprised.  I’ve felt all along Gus was staying.

yup, how I fell.

[Indianapolis-Colts-Fan]

The Colts need to go all in on the offense and getting legit skill players for AR. I’d love to see the colts draft Bowers at TE. He can do it all. If you have to trade up you trade up. Bowers would make the run game and the pass game better. This is an offense driven league. You can’t have an elite defense and an elite offense. In todays league you go all out on making sure you have an elite offense because the game itself is geared towards that. 
 

 

[Shive]

2 hours ago, 1959Colts said:

Reading between the lines of Steichen comments... It sure sounds like Gus is coming back. He specifically says how he wants continuity. I was expecting this today. The old vote of confidence

I'm not entirely convinced that's what was being said. If it's something that's not in doubt, Steichen doesn't have a problem saying it. When there's not 100% certainty, he always sidesteps. I think there's a solid chance Gus is back, but I don't think his comments today were any sort of vote of confidence.

 

Daboll just said this morning that he expected Kafka and Martindale to stay, while it was just announced that Martindale resigned. Coaches will say the safe, non-committal answer when they aren't sure.

 

1 hour ago, Superman said:

We can probably get better pass rush with some improvement up front, but if we're playing Cover 3 and Cover 4 70% of the time, we're still going to get picked apart by good QBs. Did we contest a single pass against Houston??

I'm not sure if having Myles Garrett on our DL would make a whole world of difference when our typically soft coverage allows some of the quickest time to throws in the league. I definitely think we could improve our pass rush, but I think the biggest improvement would be on the schematic side with our coverages and playing more press.

 

I want to believe that we played less press due to the young secondary, but Gus' history says that that's just not his style anyhow.

 

1 hour ago, Superman said:

I think there's room for more blitzing also, but there are games where Bradley brings extra pressure, so I think maybe there's something to work with there. That's what I mean by scheme. We're not going to hire anyone who runs 50% man coverage, or who blitzes 30% of the time.

I saw a statistic somewhere that essentially said that we had the lowest blitzing rate on 1st and 2nd downs, but one of the highest on 3rd down. Not only do we not blitz often, but when we do, it's almost entirely on 3rd down, which goes back to Gus' lack of innovation and creativity.

 

1 hour ago, Superman said:

What I want is someone who isn't simultaneously so afraid of being beat deep that he runs the most conservative defense in the league, while also getting beat deep two or three times a game.

100%

[cdgacoltsfan]

2 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Two seasons is not enough to call anything trend…

I said trending in the right direction .

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

This off season has to be different, and is going to be different. Safety, Interior DL and OL, all require vet experience to play at a high level. CBs, WRs/TEs/RBs, OTs can hit the ground running with simpler assignments, IMO, hence better candidates to dip into the draft for. A generational OG like Nelson doesn't come around too often and if they do, you need to be picking around the Top 5 to get them, like we did.

 

While I am not getting my hopes up so that it won't be squashed, the investment in the safety position would be worth it because the upper echelon safeties won't be paid nearly as much as an elite CB or pass rusher or WR, that is clearly the case based on market value. 

Part of the reason for Ballard’s zone is that you don’t have to pay the  DB’s premium money.   You can pay one corner, maybe two.   But that’s it.   I don’t believe Ballard views safety as a position to pay $10 mill per.   He might pay $7 or even $8.   Maybe.    But he’s not doing $10 and certainly not on a 4 year deal like you suggested.   
 

Things will likely be different.  But not everything.   Just some things. 

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, Shive said:

I'm not entirely convinced that's what was being said. If it's something that's not in doubt, Steichen doesn't have a problem saying it. When there's not 100% certainty, he always sidesteps. I think there's a solid chance Gus is back, but I don't think his comments today were any sort of vote of confidence.

 

Did you listen to his presser? I think it was exactly a vote of confidence, and the only reason he didn't say it with 100% certainty is because there's a process at the end of the season, with exit interviews, meetings with the owner and GM, etc. It's also possible that Bradley signed a two year contract, and it will be partly up to him to decide if he wants to return. But if it's up to Steichen, it sounds like Bradley would be back.

 

Quote

I want to believe that we played less press due to the young secondary, but Gus' history says that that's just not his style anyhow.

 

For sure. If anyone thinks Bradley will be more aggressive with different/better personnel, I think they're fooling themselves.

 

Quote

I saw a statistic somewhere that essentially said that we had the lowest blitzing rate on 1st and 2nd downs, but one of the highest on 3rd down. Not only do we not blitz often, but when we do, it's almost entirely on 3rd down, which goes back to Gus' lack of innovation and creativity.

 

Yeah that's another good point. If you only blitz on third down, it's much easier to gameplan against.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

He said he likes continuity but he didn’t specifically say he is coming back. He made it sound like it will be something him and Ballard will discuss.

[Two_pound]

I'll agree with superman here on one thing, we need to mix up coverages, disguise, blitz, you know everything you learn in defense 101. So why is Bradley so slow, or stubborn to make those adjustments. I don't believe it's lack of talent. Look at our back 7 compared to the steelers back 7. We are head and shoulders above that mess of free agents and journey men players. As long as we consistently sit in a soft zone and give 10 yard cushions we are going to have to outscore everyone, maybe with a healthy Richardson we can do that.

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Did you listen to his presser? I think it was exactly a vote of confidence, and the only reason he didn't say it with 100% certainty is because there's a process at the end of the season, with exit interviews, meetings with the owner and GM, etc. It's also possible that Bradley signed a two year contract, and it will be partly up to him to decide if he wants to return. But if it's up to Steichen, it sounds like Bradley would be back.

 

 

For sure. If anyone thinks Bradley will be more aggressive with different/better personnel, I think they're fooling themselves.

 

 

Yeah that's another good point. If you only blitz on third down, it's much easier to gameplan against.

 

Earlier today, you wrote a crushing piece about how Bradley’s defense puts a cap on just how good and effective the defense can be.  One of your better posts.  
 

But here’s the thing,  everything you wrote, Steichen and Bradley surely know all that as well.   So why is he being retained?    There has to be a good reason. 
 

Im not sure I know it.   But it could be the dollars we’d owe Bradley and his staff if they were fired?   Or maybe Steichen and Bradley have come to an understanding…. That Steichen may be more involved in-game with the Def play calling.   He may be telling Steichen to blitz more.  
 

I think there are pieces of the puzzle missing, because the decision doesn’t seem to add up to much scrutiny.  
 

Sure would love to be a fly on the wall inside the Colts facility. 

[1959Colts]

19 minutes ago, Shive said:

I'm not entirely convinced that's what was being said. If it's something that's not in doubt, Steichen doesn't have a problem saying it. When there's not 100% certainty, he always sidesteps. I think there's a solid chance Gus is back, but I don't think his comments today were any sort of vote of confidence.

 

Daboll just said this morning that he expected Kafka and Martindale to stay, while it was just announced that Martindale resigned. Coaches will say the safe, non-committal answer when they aren't sure...

Good point. I read this morning where Daboll had said he expected Martindale back, however, I didn't hear that Wink resigned.

Funny, Martindale was a candidate for the Colts HC job.

Thanks

[Hawkeyecolt]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

LOL, not a hot take at all. I thought we were in trouble depth-wise before the season started, because we were relying on Leonard and didn't know if he was healthy. We let him go, and converted a safety to LB. I t's one of the thinnest positions on the roster, and poor tackling was one of the biggest problems with the defense all season.

And when you’re dropping back encouraging your opponent to take check downs and underneath stuff you better be able to tackle. 
 

I think the people who thought Gus was going to be canned after coaching with one hand tied behind his back were being delusional.  Down Rodgers, Brents, and Flowers all season.  A Grover suspension and the release of Leonard hurt the expected talent on the field tremendously.  Let’s not lose site that this was an intended development year for a young secondary to begin with. 
 

Back to Gus.  He started playing less cover 3 and man principles to take away the big plays that were happening. When playing quarters though you better be able to tackle.  Baker Jr.  tackles like a wuss.  Our linebackers miss a lot of tackles. 
 

We also missed the veteran leadership that McLeod provided at safety.  We saw more coverage mistakes this year. Blackmon had an excellent and I think he will be retained especially if they feel he can become the leader of that secondary.   There we’re definitely more breakdowns after he got hurt. 
 

I think Ballard drafts to the coaches wants for their system. Gus and Shane will tell him what’s needed. Bring back Grove and Blackmon. Probably Moore. The teams sorely needs a dynamic playmaker added either in the secondary or edge.  DT needs depth. Johnson and Bryan don’t cut it. A LB is sorely needed too. 
 

If he can get a dynamic playmaker for the offense in Rd. 1 go for it but after that he needs to Gus some players. 
 

 

 

[Zoltan]

Just now, 1959Colts said:

Good point. I read this morning where Daboll had said he expected Martindale back, however, I didn't hear that Wink resigned.

Funny, Martindale was a candidate for the Colts HC job.

Thanks

 

Yeah looks like they fired a couple of Martindale's staff and he resigned because of it.

[Zoltan]

46 minutes ago, Indianapolis-Colts-Fan said:

The Colts need to go all in on the offense and getting legit skill players for AR. I’d love to see the colts draft Bowers at TE. He can do it all. If you have to trade up you trade up. Bowers would make the run game and the pass game better. This is an offense driven league. You can’t have an elite defense and an elite offense. In todays league you go all out on making sure you have an elite offense because the game itself is geared towards that. 
 

 

I agree with the first part but not about Bowers, I'd prefer to get a WR like Odunze, because the improvement from Pierce to Odunze would be huge, and to me I'm happy with our TE room with Woods returning next year.

[Asimov]

6 hours ago, chad72 said:

Our D-line coach needs to be retained at any cost and we should probably look at a different secondary coach to develop our young ones, IMO.

 

I agree with KB, I would try and bring in someone like Xavier McKinney from the New York Giants, he would probably cost us 4 years $40 million but would be well worth it to shore up our safety position. Safety position requires more vet experience than the CB position, IMO.

Does anyone around here remember how many people were saying the Colts needed to go get Landon Collins? Everyone was begging Ballard to go sign him, he signed a huge contract with Washington and two years later was cut. He wasn’t even on a roster this year.

 

Splash free agent signings are almost always not the answer, but no one notices when the guy they were clamoring for is out of the league in 3 years. 

[Zoltan]

10 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Earlier today, you wrote a crushing piece about how Bradley’s defense puts a cap on just how good and effective the defense can be.  One of your better posts.  
 

But here’s the thing,  everything you wrote, Steichen and Bradley surely know all that as well.   So why is he being retained?    There has to be a good reason. 
 

Im not sure I know it.   But it could be the dollars we’d owe Bradley and his staff if they were fired?   Or maybe Steichen and Bradley have come to an understanding…. That Steichen may be more involved in-game with the Def play calling.   He may be telling Steichen to blitz more.  
 

I think there are pieces of the puzzle missing, because the decision doesn’t seem to add up to much scrutiny.  
 

Sure would love to be a fly on the wall inside the Colts facility. 

 

Idk why he is getting kept but I would have loved poaching the Falcons DC with Arthur Smith getting fired. Ryan Nielsen did a great job this year, taking a bottom tier defense a year before to an arguably top 10 defense this year. I also like his background as a DL coach.

[krunk]

I mean how complex did you expect the coverages to be with a secondary full of young players? I mean the only guy you could even remotely call a vet was Blackmon. The scheme is supposed to be simple when you're looking for these guys to come in right away and play. You can add a little bit more with continuity. Some of these guys like Cross are just now starting to figure things out. Keep this in mind 

[Shive]

1 minute ago, krunk said:

I mean how complex did you expect the coverages to be with a secondary full of young players? I mean the only guy you could even remotely call a vet was Blackmon. The scheme is supposed to be simple when you're looking for these guys to come in right away and play. You can add a little bit more with continuity. Some of these guys like Cross are just now starting to figure things out. Keep this in mind 

The only issue I have with that is that Bradley's history says that even when he has had elite talent in the secondary, he hasn't done that.

[Zoltan]

1 minute ago, Shive said:

The only issue I have with that is that Bradley's history says that even when he has had elite talent in the secondary, he hasn't done that.

 

Yeah, I think thats the thing having elite talent helps but Bradley will still be Bradley. Meanwhile there are DCs in this league that are taking less talented defensive rosters and having better production than us. So how I see it yeah adding elite talent will raise the floor of our defense but with how it is ran, we will keep underperforming.

[Superman]

10 minutes ago, krunk said:

I mean how complex did you expect the coverages to be with a secondary full of young players? I mean the only guy you could even remotely call a vet was Blackmon. The scheme is supposed to be simple when you're looking for these guys to come in right away and play. You can add a little bit more with continuity. Some of these guys like Cross are just now starting to figure things out. Keep this in mind 

 

Do you think it's too difficult to teach young DBs how to play Cover 2 and Cover 6? These are basic NFL coverages, and Bradley's staff is supposed to be great at teaching fundamentals.

[1959Colts]

23 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

I agree with the first part but not about Bowers, I'd prefer to get a WR like Odunze, because the improvement from Pierce to Odunze would be huge, and to me I'm happy with our TE room with Woods returning next year.

Rome Odunze is a interesting prospect. I will be watching tonight, since Washington has a good group of WRs.

I wonder if any of their other wideouts will be entering the draft?

[Superman]

28 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Earlier today, you wrote a crushing piece about how Bradley’s defense puts a cap on just how good and effective the defense can be.  One of your better posts.  
 

But here’s the thing,  everything you wrote, Steichen and Bradley surely know all that as well.   So why is he being retained?    There has to be a good reason. 
 

Im not sure I know it.   But it could be the dollars we’d owe Bradley and his staff if they were fired?   Or maybe Steichen and Bradley have come to an understanding…. That Steichen may be more involved in-game with the Def play calling.   He may be telling Steichen to blitz more.  
 

I think there are pieces of the puzzle missing, because the decision doesn’t seem to add up to much scrutiny.  
 

Sure would love to be a fly on the wall inside the Colts facility. 

 

It's a good question. The most cynical response is that the Colts value continuity over improvement. I don't think I believe that, but that seems like the basis for Steichen's answer earlier today.

 

I don't think it's a financial thing. Bradley and his staff can't be making much, and I'm sure they all have offsets.

 

And I don't think that Steichen would want to be more involved in the defensive game planning, when he's already intimately involved in the offensive game planning. (By the way, I always talk about how I dislike my HC being a primary play caller; Steichen seemed absolutely locked in all season, one of the rare examples of how to handle the play calling and still nail all the game management decisions. And he was also engaged with defensive players and special teamers. If anyone can handle that responsibility, it's Steichen, IMO.)

 

And I don't want a DC that has to be prodded to change his approach. If Steichen is having to plead with Bradley to make adjustments, then they aren't on the same page, and Steichen should hire someone that's a better fit.

 

I guess they had low expectations for the defense, given the state of the roster and the developmental nature of this season. And maybe they hope that another offseason brings improvement, which will lead to better output from the defense. It would be nice to hear comprehensive thoughts from Steichen about the defense and future expectations, but today probably wasn't the time for that. 

[KB]

28 minutes ago, Asimov said:

Does anyone around here remember how many people were saying the Colts needed to go get Landon Collins? Everyone was begging Ballard to go sign him, he signed a huge contract with Washington and two years later was cut. He wasn’t even on a roster this year.

 

Splash free agent signings are almost always not the answer, but no one notices when the guy they were clamoring for is out of the league in 3 years. 

We don't need to make a splash to get what we need out of the FS position. We needs a Mike Adams really. He wasn't anything spectacular outside of his experience as a safety. That alone put him in the right spot and helped our secondary. He was probably the best free safety we have had in a long time too.

[krunk]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Do you think it's too difficult to teach young DBs how to play Cover 2 and Cover 6? These are basic NFL coverages, and Bradley's staff is supposed to be great at teaching fundamentals.

No I don't.