Gus Bradley likely staying

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Good question Bowen just asked on the radio. Bradley might not even be under contract. So if he stays he might need a new contract. That makes sense now why Steichen didn’t flat out say he staying.

[ColtStrong2013]

48 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Good question Bowen just asked on the radio. Bradley might not even be under contract. So if he stays he might need a new contract. That makes sense now why Steichen didn’t flat out say he staying.

 

If there was a time to move on, it would be now. 

I just don't think they will. I see them giving him the benefit of the doubt with injuries. Do the evaluation, sit him down and see how he feels about a one year deal. 

[Superman]

3 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Good question Bowen just asked on the radio. Bradley might not even be under contract. So if he stays he might need a new contract. That makes sense now why Steichen didn’t flat out say he staying.

 

Kevin sounds really smart when he steals my reasoning.

 

On 1/8/2024 at 1:24 PM, 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.

[Zoltan]

3 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Good question Bowen just asked on the radio. Bradley might not even be under contract. So if he stays he might need a new contract. That makes sense now why Steichen didn’t flat out say he staying.

 

Well if anyone was holding on to hope that Bradley may still not be coming back I think Bradley is officially staying, because I feel we would have heard something yesterday since Tuesday was gonna be the day Steichen met with the coaching staff.

[John Hammonds]

On 1/10/2024 at 12:07 PM, Superman said:

 

Kevin sounds really smart when he steals my reasoning.

 

I'm choosing to read between the lines of Chris Ballard's comments.

Is Bradley under contract for 2024?  Yes.

Is Bradley under contract beyond 2024?  Um....

Is 28th in points against two years in a row satisfactory?  No.

Were we forced to start rookies and special teams players in our defensive backfield this year?  Yes.

 

Bottom line:  I expect Gus Bradley to be firmly on the hot seat this season.  We're going to the playoffs.  Period.  No more excuses. Be better, or be replaced.

[NewColtsFan]

16 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

I'm choosing to read between the lines of Chris Ballard's comments.

Is Bradley under contract for 2024?  Yes.

Is Bradley under contract beyond 2024?  Um....

Is 28th in points against two years in a row satisfactory?  No.

Were we forced to start rookies and special teams players in our defensive backfield this year?  Yes.

 

Bottom line:  I expect Gus Bradley to be firmly on the hot seat this season.  We're going to the playoffs.  Period.  No more excuses. Be better, or be replaced.

Ballard also said he didn’t give Bradley much talent and that’s on him (Ballard)

 

Ballard said the kids can’t get better unless they play so they let them play.  That’s for better and for worse.  I think everyone’s seat is HOT, including Ballard’s. 
 

Yes, Ballard says he’s encouraged about the future,  but if things go wrong in 24,  if AR gets hurt again,  things will get very tense and uncomfortable in the facility.  

[Solid84]

8 hours ago, John Hammonds said:

I'm choosing to read between the lines of Chris Ballard's comments.

Is Bradley under contract for 2024?  Yes.

Is Bradley under contract beyond 2024?  Um....

Is 28th in points against two years in a row satisfactory?  No.

Were we forced to start rookies and special teams players in our defensive backfield this year?  Yes.

 

Bottom line:  I expect Gus Bradley to be firmly on the hot seat this season.  We're going to the playoffs.  Period.  No more excuses. Be better, or be replaced.

Ballard said it was his choice to go young in the secondary and he knew that ment they would have to take their lumps. In my opinion it sounded like Ballard taking that on himself and giving Bradley a pass.

[ColtStrong2013]

Imagine watching CJ stroud throwing all over the Browns in the first half of the wildcard playoffs and still thinking Gus Bradley is why we lost to them last week…

[TheBlueAndWhite]

this is all i want our corners to do, why is it so hard lol.

 

 

[twfish]

So we are all living with the excuse of lack of talent in the back end for 2024, but what about last year when we had guys like Gilmore, Rodgers, flowers and he got to bring in his own guys like Facsyon and Rodney Mcleod. It was a bad year in all but we watched teams do the exact same things to us. He will be the reason we will lose games going into this season IMHO.

[TheBlueAndWhite]

34 minutes ago, twfish said:

So we are all living with the excuse of lack of talent in the back end for 2024, but what about last year when we had guys like Gilmore, Rodgers, flowers and he got to bring in his own guys like Facsyon and Rodney Mcleod. It was a bad year in all but we watched teams do the exact same things to us. He will be the reason we will lose games going into this season IMHO.

Amen, the guy is average at best as the stats indicate and have indicated for a long time, im sick of him being here, and im sick of his scheme, if irsay is serious about another championship, get him out of the building, good defense is about 3 things that bradley doesn't do, deception, disruption and disguise.

 

 

[Solid84]

3 hours ago, TheBlueAndWhite said:

this is all i want our corners to do, why is it so hard lol.

 

 

Well, first of we don't play man...

[Hawkeyecolt]

22 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Imagine watching CJ stroud throwing all over the Browns in the first half of the wildcard playoffs and still thinking Gus Bradley is why we lost to them last week…

You mean Schwartz shouldn’t be fired for Nico Collins having a good game when he’s the Texans only weapon. 😂

[Hawkeyecolt]

5 hours ago, TheBlueAndWhite said:

Amen, the guy is average at best as the stats indicate and have indicated for a long time, im sick of him being here, and im sick of his scheme, if irsay is serious about another championship, get him out of the building, good defense is about 3 things that bradley doesn't do, deception, disruption and disguise.

 

 

Cover-3 was the most used scheme in the NFL last year.  Cover-2 was second. I know you’re not saying it here but I find it strange when people call it out of date. 

[AustexColt]

We need a new defensive strategy. Gus and his staff are veteran coaches and hopefully Steichen will demand that they change. Ballard really needs to sign explosive defensive and offensive players this offseason. Its his 8th season and in my books he is on the hot seat. We need Safeties of the Bob Sanders mold. Cross and Thomas don't cut it. 

[GoColts8818]

5 hours ago, AustexColt said:

We need a new defensive strategy. Gus and his staff are veteran coaches and hopefully Steichen will demand that they change. Ballard really needs to sign explosive defensive and offensive players this offseason. Its his 8th season and in my books he is on the hot seat. We need Safeties of the Bob Sanders mold. Cross and Thomas don't cut it. 

Coaches don’t just change what they believe in and their system they have spent their life developing.  If you want that changed you change the coach.  The Colts elected not to do that.  So all we can hope is Ballard is right about it being young players like he was right about the line last year and not making changes despite a lot of fans wanting them.  
 

As for Ballard he said in press conference he knows both the offense and defense needs more explosive players.  The thing is every team in the league is looking for the samething and when they find them they normally don’t let them get to free agency.  If one does and Ballard thinks they will help the Colts you can bet he will make a push for them, the key is Ballard thinking it helps them though, not what fans want.  We don’t get a vote.

 

Regarding him being on the hot seat he’s not.  Irsay more or less cast judgement on him last year when he didn’t fire him and let him hire a new coach and draft a new QB.  Like it or not Irsay pretty much reset the clock on Ballard.  Then Irsay said before the year he wanted to see progress this year and there is no denying this team made progress this year compared to last year.  So Ballard is most likely in good graces with Irsay which Colts fans who want Ballard gone don’t like accepting.

[NewColtsFan]

11 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Well, first of we don't play man...

Well….  To the best of my knowledge, KC isn’t either.   I believe they’re primarily a zone defense and they mix in some man.   I’m not looking at any stats, do your stats show otherwise?   

[Solid84]

51 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Well….  To the best of my knowledge, KC isn’t either.   I believe they’re primarily a zone defense and they mix in some man.   I’m not looking at any stats, do your stats show otherwise?   

I think they do too, but I think the Colts are one of the teams using man coverage least, mean stuff like this is less likely to happen. 

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, Solid84 said:

I think they do too, but I think the Colts are one of the teams using man coverage least, mean stuff like this is less likely to happen. 

Thanks.   I thought @Superman had said that the Colts are playing a little more man this year than last.   How much more I don’t recall? 
 

Perhaps he can confirm….  

[CoachLite]

6 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Coaches don’t just change what they believe in and their system they have spent their life developing.  If you want that changed you change the coach.  The Colts elected not to do that.  So all we can hope is Ballard is right about it being young players like he was right about the line last year and not making changes despite a lot of fans wanting them.  
 

As for Ballard he said in press conference he knows both the offense and defense needs more explosive players.  The thing is every team in the league is looking for the samething and when they find them they normally don’t let them get to free agency.  If one does and Ballard thinks they will help the Colts you can bet he will make a push for them, the key is Ballard thinking it helps them though, not what fans want.  We don’t get a vote.

 

Regarding him being on the hot seat he’s not.  Irsay more or less cast judgement on him last year when he didn’t fire him and let him hire a new coach and draft a new QB.  Like it or not Irsay pretty much reset the clock on Ballard.  Then Irsay said before the year he wanted to see progress this year and there is no denying this team made progress this year compared to last year.  So Ballard is most likely in good graces with Irsay which Colts fans who want Ballard gone don’t like accepting.

What with the suspicious officiating, the Colts staying with Bradley, it's becoming difficult to remain a fan of Colts football. I suppose it is regression to the mean, and the mean is getting lower and lower each year.

[NewColtsFan]

5 hours ago, CoachLite said:

What with the suspicious officiating, the Colts staying with Bradley, it's becoming difficult to remain a fan of Colts football. I suppose it is regression to the mean, and the mean is getting lower and lower each year.

Why would you get down on the Colts over suspicious officiating?   Why is that the Colts fault?    Seems there are plenty of other  legit reasons.   But I’m confused on the officiating comment.  Can you elaborate?   

[Superman]

6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Thanks.   I thought @Superman had said that the Colts are playing a little more man this year than last.   How much more I don’t recall? 
 

Perhaps he can confirm….  

 

I don't know if we played more man. Maybe there was a stretch earlier in the season where there was some man coverage?? I don't remember, it was a long season...

 

22 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Well, first of we don't play man...

 

I'm not calling for us to bury receivers at the LOS, but it's possible to bump receivers at the line and then drop back into zone coverage. The problem is that if you miss, you're toast.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Colts don’t play all zone. Yes they do play some man.

[CoachLite]

6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Why would you get down on the Colts over suspicious officiating?   Why is that the Colts fault?    Seems there are plenty of other  legit reasons.   But I’m confused on the officiating comment.  Can you elaborate?   

I'm not so much down on the Colts as I am down on football in general. Some of the Colts decisions baffle me, but I'm always free to be a fan of another team, another sport, or just opt to take a nap.

[Hawkeyecolt]

I thought the guys on  locked on Colts did a good review of Gus Bradley and the defense today.  It was fair.  The good, the bad, and the misinformation.

[John Hammonds]

I know this topic has aged a little bit.  But something just hit me.

 

I was having a conversation about the fan demand for Gus Bradley to play more modern Vic Fangio Cover-6 defense, and found myself having to explain the evolution to the Cover-6:

• Cover-2:  Both safeties play back, dividing the deep field into two zones.  The corners are responsible for the flats.
• Cover-3 (Gus's defense):  Single high Free Safety, with both corners playing back, dividing the deep field into three zones.  The outside linebackers are responsible for the flats.
• Cover-4 (Quarters):  All four DB's play back, dividing the deep field into four zones.
• Cover-6 (Fangio):  Used against the popular 3-by-1 offensive formations.  Divide the field in half.  On the 3 WR side, play Quarters (CB and Safety back, LB in flat).  On the 1 WR side, play Cover-2 (Safety back, CB in the flat, looking like the WR is single covered.)

And it suddenly hit me.  In order to play Cover-6 you need to have both guys playing Free Safety on both halves of the field.

Gus Bradley doesn't run the Fangio defense, not because he's stubborn, but because he can't.  He's limited by personnel.  Blackmon and Cross both play Strong Safety.  Thomas is our only Free Safety.  He doesn't play it that well, so he barely counts.  We don't play this defense because we can't play this defense.  And he won't play it next year either, unless he gets better personnel at the Free Safety position.

 

Am I wrong on this?

[Dingus McGirt]

12 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

I know this topic has aged a little bit.  But something just hit me.

 

I was having a conversation about the fan demand for Gus Bradley to play more modern Vic Fangio Cover-6 defense, and found myself having to explain the evolution to the Cover-6:

• Cover-2:  Both safeties play back, dividing the deep field into two zones.  The corners are responsible for the flats.
• Cover-3 (Gus's defense):  Single high Free Safety, with both corners playing back, dividing the deep field into three zones.  The outside linebackers are responsible for the flats.
• Cover-4 (Quarters):  All four DB's play back, dividing the deep field into four zones.
• Cover-6 (Fangio):  Used against the popular 3-by-1 offensive formations.  Divide the field in half.  On the 3 WR side, play Quarters (CB and Safety back, LB in flat).  On the 1 WR side, play Cover-2 (Safety back, CB in the flat, looking like the WR is single covered.)

And it suddenly hit me.  In order to play Cover-6 you need to have both guys playing Free Safety on both halves of the field.

Gus Bradley doesn't run the Fangio defense, not because he's stubborn, but because he can't.  He's limited by personnel.  Blackmon and Cross both play Strong Safety.  Thomas is our only Free Safety.  He doesn't play it that well, so he barely counts.  We don't play this defense because we can't play this defense.  And he won't play it next year either, unless he gets better personnel at the Free Safety position.

 

Am I wrong on this?

I don’t know.  But, you sold me.  :^)

[Hawkeyecolt]

40 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

I know this topic has aged a little bit.  But something just hit me.

 

I was having a conversation about the fan demand for Gus Bradley to play more modern Vic Fangio Cover-6 defense, and found myself having to explain the evolution to the Cover-6:

• Cover-2:  Both safeties play back, dividing the deep field into two zones.  The corners are responsible for the flats.
• Cover-3 (Gus's defense):  Single high Free Safety, with both corners playing back, dividing the deep field into three zones.  The outside linebackers are responsible for the flats.
• Cover-4 (Quarters):  All four DB's play back, dividing the deep field into four zones.
• Cover-6 (Fangio):  Used against the popular 3-by-1 offensive formations.  Divide the field in half.  On the 3 WR side, play Quarters (CB and Safety back, LB in flat).  On the 1 WR side, play Cover-2 (Safety back, CB in the flat, looking like the WR is single covered.)

And it suddenly hit me.  In order to play Cover-6 you need to have both guys playing Free Safety on both halves of the field.

Gus Bradley doesn't run the Fangio defense, not because he's stubborn, but because he can't.  He's limited by personnel.  Blackmon and Cross both play Strong Safety.  Thomas is our only Free Safety.  He doesn't play it that well, so he barely counts.  We don't play this defense because we can't play this defense.  And he won't play it next year either, unless he gets better personnel at the Free Safety position.

 

Am I wrong on this?

Bradley actually played more Cover 6 than he ever has this past season. They played it to a high level of success.  Did they play it as much as Cover-3 or Cover-4?  Not even close. Gus called the most Cover-3 in the NFL, but not by a lot.  Cover-3 was the most called coverage in the league last year.  
 

Whether it’s Cover-3 or Cover-4 the team has to tackle the underneath stuff that is given to the opponent. The Colts tackled like krap. 
 

Blackmon can play either SS or FS so to your point on Cover-6 I’m not sure that’s why the Colts don’t play it more. Cover-3 should prevent big plays.  There were a lot of communication breakdowns and blown coverages this year that involved Rodney Thomas.  I think the Colts bring in a veteran safety to fix these issues next season. Blackmon can play SS, FS, or slot. I expect him back, but I expect another safety to be signed in free agency to provide a veteran voice. 

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, John Hammonds said:

Gus Bradley doesn't run the Fangio defense, not because he's stubborn, but because he can't.  He's limited by personnel.  Blackmon and Cross both play Strong Safety.  Thomas is our only Free Safety.  He doesn't play it that well, so he barely counts.  We don't play this defense because we can't play this defense.  And he won't play it next year either, unless he gets better personnel at the Free Safety position.

 

I agree. I think personnel, especially at safety has been limiting for Gus. I don't think it's ironic Ballard talked about needing to improve the safety play. I think they like Blackmon, and will look to retain him, but I see Ballard potentially being aggressive at the safety position in Free agency. I know they like Scott coming back from injury, but he's still raw. They want a veteran back there as a major upgrade. 

[richard pallo]

45 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I agree. I think personnel, especially at safety has been limiting for Gus. I don't think it's ironic Ballard talked about needing to improve the safety play. I think they like Blackmon, and will look to retain him, but I see Ballard potentially being aggressive at the safety position in Free agency. I know they like Scott coming back from injury, but he's still raw. They want a veteran back there as a major upgrade. 

This is why I think the Giants FS Xavier McKinney will be the target in FA.

[Superman]

16 hours ago, John Hammonds said:

Am I wrong on this?

 

The only thing I disagree with is your conclusion. Bradley doesn't run move Cover 6 because he's set in his ways, not because he's limited by personnel.

 

I also think the safety responsibilities in a split safety defense, like Cover 6, are simpler and require less range than the safety responsibilities in a single high defense, like Cover 3, which Bradley loves. So if we don't have the safeties for Cover 6, then we definitely don't have the safeties for Cover 3. Yet we run a ton of Cover 3.

[ChuggaBeer]

18 hours ago, John Hammonds said:

I know this topic has aged a little bit.  But something just hit me.

 

I was having a conversation about the fan demand for Gus Bradley to play more modern Vic Fangio Cover-6 defense, and found myself having to explain the evolution to the Cover-6:

• Cover-2:  Both safeties play back, dividing the deep field into two zones.  The corners are responsible for the flats.
• Cover-3 (Gus's defense):  Single high Free Safety, with both corners playing back, dividing the deep field into three zones.  The outside linebackers are responsible for the flats.
• Cover-4 (Quarters):  All four DB's play back, dividing the deep field into four zones.
• Cover-6 (Fangio):  Used against the popular 3-by-1 offensive formations.  Divide the field in half.  On the 3 WR side, play Quarters (CB and Safety back, LB in flat).  On the 1 WR side, play Cover-2 (Safety back, CB in the flat, looking like the WR is single covered.)

And it suddenly hit me.  In order to play Cover-6 you need to have both guys playing Free Safety on both halves of the field.

Gus Bradley doesn't run the Fangio defense, not because he's stubborn, but because he can't.  He's limited by personnel.  Blackmon and Cross both play Strong Safety.  Thomas is our only Free Safety.  He doesn't play it that well, so he barely counts.  We don't play this defense because we can't play this defense.  And he won't play it next year either, unless he gets better personnel at the Free Safety position.

 

Am I wrong on this?

I mentioned this in the Ballard press conference thread.     Gus uses the old school FS/SS concept instead of the interchangeable safeties like most of the league is using .   Maybe he can change but he never has that I know of.    And I believe safety is of high priority for this D 

[OLD FAN MAN]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The only thing I disagree with is your conclusion. Bradley doesn't run move Cover 6 because he's set in his ways, not because he's limited by personnel.

 

I also think the safety responsibilities in a split safety defense, like Cover 6, are simpler and require less range than the safety responsibilities in a single high defense, like Cover 3, which Bradley loves. So if we don't have the safeties for Cover 6, then we definitely don't have the safeties for Cover 3. Yet we run a ton of Cover 3.

basically we run cover no one

[ColtStrong2013]

17 hours ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

basically we run cover no one

 

[Moosejawcolt]

On 1/14/2024 at 3:19 PM, Hawkeyecolt said:

Cover-3 was the most used scheme in the NFL last year.  Cover-2 was second. I know you’re not saying it here but I find it strange when people call it out of date. 

Cover 3 and cover 2 is not the issue. Teams use it around the league  and that is not the issue. They call it for certain circumstances and  sprinkle it in here and there . The problem is that the Colts use it mostly all the time. You will never be successful in this league if you primarily run one coverage all  the time. How affective would you think the Colts offence would be if they primarily ran the same play over and over and stayed in the same groupings all the time? The qbs are to smart now a days and if you stay in the same coverage 90% of the time you will get eaten up.. The other issue is that the Colts don't have the talent to run the scheme they want to run. It would be like a defense that blitzed 90% of the time yet did not have the right personal. Even if they did, running primarily one coverage all game is just not going to get it done.  I have said this many times that in order to run what the Colts want to run, the  need a dominant front four and they are average at best. To me look at the niners. They run kind of the same scheme as do the Bills .They employ light but quick fronts hoping to get to the qb. They are a huge liability against the run. Niners are looking horrible upfront the last 2 play off games. I have said it over and over. You get an offensive line, a good one and Detroit is elite, and they will eat at Tampa style front for lunch. That is why i have always said to dump this D as  I don't foresee winning a Superbowl with it.

[richard pallo]

I’m surprised Gus hasn’t filled those coaching vacancies by now.  Since we didn’t renew their contracts I would have thought he had other coaches lined up.  Apparently not.  

[chad72]

On 1/29/2024 at 3:51 PM, Moosejawcolt said:

Cover 3 and cover 2 is not the issue. Teams use it around the league  and that is not the issue. They call it for certain circumstances and  sprinkle it in here and there . The problem is that the Colts use it mostly all the time. You will never be successful in this league if you primarily run one coverage all  the time. How affective would you think the Colts offence would be if they primarily ran the same play over and over and stayed in the same groupings all the time? The qbs are to smart now a days and if you stay in the same coverage 90% of the time you will get eaten up.. The other issue is that the Colts don't have the talent to run the scheme they want to run. It would be like a defense that blitzed 90% of the time yet did not have the right personal. Even if they did, running primarily one coverage all game is just not going to get it done.  I have said this many times that in order to run what the Colts want to run, the  need a dominant front four and they are average at best. To me look at the niners. They run kind of the same scheme as do the Bills .They employ light but quick fronts hoping to get to the qb. They are a huge liability against the run. Niners are looking horrible upfront the last 2 play off games. I have said it over and over. You get an offensive line, a good one and Detroit is elite, and they will eat at Tampa style front for lunch. That is why i have always said to dump this D as  I don't foresee winning a Superbowl with it.

 

You need elite safety play for our D scheme to work better along with 6-7 quality bodies on the DL to help out the secondary.

 

At LB, we fatefully chose Leonard over Okereke and we could have used Okereke's long arms that he was drafted for in pass coverage, would be a very good asset in the Seahawks' style D we want to enforce. We need some LBs and safeties that can lay the wood and/or enforce and make them pay for a late throw. But it always starts up front and we need active DL that steps up even against very good OLs to keep us in the game.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

31 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I’m surprised Gus hasn’t filled those coaching vacancies by now.  Since we didn’t renew their contracts I would have thought he had other coaches lined up.  Apparently not.  

I know. Not even any rumors. Maybe who they want is playing in the SB.

[richard pallo]

12 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I know. Not even any rumors. Maybe who they want is playing in the SB.

That’s possible I guess but these openings are for position coaches.  A lateral move I would think for them.  New HC are filling out their staffs now.  I just hope he gets the coaches he wants.

[GoColts8818]

Sometimes you know you need to make changes before you know exactly who you are brining in and while you probably have a few guys in mind you want to talk to it takes time to talk to them, make a decision, and then hire them.  You generally don’t bring in positional coaches for in person meetings in todays world and the team doesn’t put out updates like they do head coach candidates and the media doesn’t really report on positional coaches until they are hired or about to be hired because the vast majority of people don’t know the people being interviewed.  
 

So while we might not know something publicly doesn’t mean they aren’t working through things behind the scenes.  These are important hires that they don’t want to rush on so patience is required here.  I know we want to know but we will find out in time.