Why is Ballard not improving his Secondary?

[RollerColt]

21 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Agreed. And I think, more fundamentally, if Irsay felt like he needed to prompt Ballard to change his philosophy or methods, then it would be better to find a different GM. 

Yep. He would've moved on after the 2022 season. It would've been the prime opportunity to start over with a new coach and GM tandem. 

 

To me that said a lot and meant he was in parallel with the plan moving forward on team development. We can all get angry and shout to the heavens, but it looks like it's going to be Chris, Shane and Anthony tied together on how this entire thing works out. 

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

I think it means the team will have greater cap flexibility while Richardson is on his rookie contract. I don't think it means Irsay is going to pressure Ballard into being more aggressive with roster building.

I don’t think Irsay is going to pressure anyone to do anything at this stage. He knows he has to trust the process or he wont even dream of seeing another championship in what may be a short life left for him… he’s bought in. 
 

I think Ballard will shock us at some point though- he just has to have the things that need to go right to happen: AR staying healthy and becoming a true franchise qb that people will want to come play with, winning the division/making the playoffs, etc. I only say that because he’s alluded to being open to making moves if they think it’s right, and clearly tried to get Hunter/move up in the draft this offseason. If we make the playoffs this year and AR has a good healthy year, I don’t think it’s out of sort to say he’ll look to make some noise next offseason. It could easily not go his way, and he stays the course with his usual retaining his own/focusing on draft, but I think the effort will be there. 

[Two_pound]

I have enjoyed this topic this summer, but, historically speaking when have the Colts played even played mediocre pass defense in the past 50 years? 1987 was good. Eugene Daniel and Chris Goode at corner and Kieth Taylor and Michael Ball at safety. '95 was good. Eugene Daniel and Ray Buchanan at corner and Jason Belser at safety. Both those teams had excellent linebackers. And if it so so important to have "shut down corners" as some on here proclaim, why did Bill Tobin let Ray Buchanon walk??????????? The Payton years even with Dungy as head coach we gave up numerous 3rd and longs which kept Payton and the offense on the bench. Just for craps and giggles yesterday I watched the 2003 season opener against the browns in Cleveland. It was a low scoring game(9-6 final), but we made Kelly Holcomb look like he was on his way to Canton. Harper, Walt Harris, David Macklin were the corners, Doss, Idrees Bashir and Cory Bird were the safeties. We had an excellent pass rush, but still gave up numerous third and longs. We even gave up a stupendous 19 yard completion on a 2nd and 17 because the vanilla  zone was so soft I could see the ice cream melting all over the field. For those of you with short memories, Bert jones had to out score everyone, Payton had to out score everyone, and Luck had to out score every one. My money says Richardson will have to out score every one also. The most infuriating question of them all is, How come in the last 50 years the Colts haven't had a gm who knows how to build a defense, after all isn't the old saying "defense wins championships!"

[Superman]

23 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I don’t think Irsay is going to pressure anyone to do anything at this stage. He knows he has to trust the process or he wont even dream of seeing another championship in what may be a short life left for him… he’s bought in. 
 

I think Ballard will shock us at some point though- he just has to have the things that need to go right to happen: AR staying healthy and becoming a true franchise qb that people will want to come play with, winning the division/making the playoffs, etc. I only say that because he’s alluded to being open to making moves if they think it’s right, and clearly tried to get Hunter/move up in the draft this offseason. If we make the playoffs this year and AR has a good healthy year, I don’t think it’s out of sort to say he’ll look to make some noise next offseason. It could easily not go his way, and he stays the course with his usual retaining his own/focusing on draft, but I think the effort will be there. 

 

This is the same Chris Ballard who traded a first rounder for Buckner and signed him to a top of market contract. He has the capacity to take a big swing, when he thinks the time is right, for the right player. But I think there's this idea that Irsay is going to come in, give him a paddling, and tell him to go spend big right now. And buying into that is just setting yourself up for disappointment, which leads to the annual March Meltdown.

 

Also, the Colts committed a bunch of future money this offseason, and we have Ryan Kelly, Kwity Paye, Dayo, Blackmon, Speed, etc., all hitting free agency in 2025. I expect a similar strategy to this offseason -- keep several of our own FAs, and very few outside additions, if any. 

 

My point is that I don't think Ballard is going to change his roster building strategy, or the underlying philosophies upon which his strategy is built. 

[ColtStrong2013]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

This is the same Chris Ballard who traded a first rounder for Buckner and signed him to a top of market contract. He has the capacity to take a big swing, when he thinks the time is right, for the right player. But I think there's this idea that Irsay is going to come in, give him a paddling, and tell him to go spend big right now. And buying into that is just setting yourself up for disappointment, which leads to the annual March Meltdown.

 

Also, the Colts committed a bunch of future money this offseason, and we have Ryan Kelly, Kwity Paye, Dayo, Blackmon, Speed, etc., all hitting free agency in 2025. I expect a similar strategy to this offseason -- keep several of our own FAs, and very few outside additions, if any. 

 

My point is that I don't think Ballard is going to change his roster building strategy, or the underlying philosophies upon which his strategy is built. 

 

I agree. The one thing that could change that overnight is letting go of Bradley. That could require a major change in personnel on the defensive side of the ball, which is where I see any investments next offseason going anyway.

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, Two_pound said:

historically speaking when have the Colts played even played mediocre pass defense in the past 50 years?

 

2007. Bob Sanders got DPOY that year, also. The Colts were legit top five against the pass, at or near the top of the board in several categories. The scheme gave up a high completion percentage, but the second level played the scheme to near perfection. We didn't give up big plays, they tackled quickly and effectively, and they caused a lot of turnovers. The pass rush wasn't even at it's peak, partly because Mathis and Freeney both got hurt later in the year. Only 22 sacks, but teams were playing hot potato due to the threat of the pass rush. Sadly, that threat was non-existent by the time we got to the playoffs... 

 

IMO, that was the best defense of the Manning era. The overall team was better in 2005, and we had better finishes in other seasons, but the overall defense, and especially against the pass, was really good in 2007. If not for Mathis and Freeney getting hurt, that season might have ended much differently.

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I agree. The one thing that could change that overnight is letting go of Bradley. That could require a major change in personnel on the defensive side of the ball, which is where I see any investments next offseason going anyway.

 

There was at least some indication that the Colts might consider a different defensive approach. They interviewed some interesting guys for DC in 2022, and then some defensive minded guys for HC in 2023. But I think Ballard ultimately wants a zone based defense, and even if we had a different DC, he'd still lean toward zone based DBs. So even with an adjusted defensive approach, I wouldn't expect a major personnel change as long as Ballard is the GM.

 

And honestly, I don't think it's necessary. I think we could use better DBs, but I think the way the defense is called by Bradley is a major handicap. I feel like he could make two simple schematic adjustments that would yield better results in the passing game, without making a single change in personnel. 1) Use more Cover 2 and 6, which would mean less Cover 3 and 4, and ultimately less predictability in our coverages from play to play; and 2) Allow our big outside corners to play closer to the line of scrimmage, even on Cover 4 downs. 

[Two_pound]

Yea, I know there were a few years sprinkled in where we had good defense, as I alluded to. The '05 team I believe finished top 3 total defense, then went to the playoffs and looked like they hadn't practiced for 2 months. ( I know that was because of Dungy's family tragedy and you can't hold that against anyone on that team it would have been awful to go through that, real life and family is more important than football). Overall and generally speaking though, in the past 50 years our defense has underperformed and at times downright sucked way to often.

[Two_pound]

And also Superman, just blitzing another 5-8 times a game would make a difference. We have the athletes who would be great blitzers. Speed, Carlies, Simpson, Cross, and Harrison. I would like to see Land stand up and move around to attack the line of scrimmage also, he excelled at that in college.

[ColtStrong2013]

5 minutes ago, Two_pound said:

And also Superman, just blitzing another 5-8 times a game would make a difference. We have the athletes who would be great blitzers. Speed, Carlies, Simpson, Cross, and Harrison. I would like to see Land stand up and move around to attack the line of scrimmage also, he excelled at that in college.

im hopeful that with more efficiency/consistency on offense, we see a more aggressive defense. Playing corners at line like Superman said, creative blitzing… I think an efficient offense/more aggressive defense could give the offense the ball more via turnovers and quick 3 and outs which would complement each other, especially late in the game if the pass rush continues improving. 

[Solid84]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think it means the team will have greater cap flexibility while Richardson is on his rookie contract. I don't think it means Irsay is going to pressure Ballard into being more aggressive with roster building.

That's fair but not at all what I get from a comment like that. I'm not saying Irsay will start making demands, that's not really his style, but to me it reads like there's a pretty clear expectation we need to "win big" while AR's on his rookie deal. I would imagine Irsay and Ballard has had that conversation for Irsay to say something like that in an interview. That doesn't allow much room for Ballard to keep up his usual waiting game in my opinion.

 

Again, this is IF AR proves he's our guy this season.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Cross had the and/or removed off the depth chart at Fs.

[RollerColt]

27 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Cross had the and/or removed off the depth chart at Fs.

Not too shocking after this weekend. 

[Superman]

2 hours ago, Solid84 said:

That's fair but not at all what I get from a comment like that. I'm not saying Irsay will start making demands, that's not really his style, but to me it reads like there's a pretty clear expectation we need to "win big" while AR's on his rookie deal. I would imagine Irsay and Ballard has had that conversation for Irsay to say something like that in an interview. That doesn't allow much room for Ballard to keep up his usual waiting game in my opinion.

 

Again, this is IF AR proves he's our guy this season.

 

I don't disagree with the bolded. I think that's basically what Irsay said. But to me, that doesn't translate into thinking that Ballard is going to change the way he does things. I think Ballard has already shown a willingness to take a swing, like he did in 2020. And I view his attempts to trade up in the draft in the same way. 

 

I guess my point is that people keep looking for clues that Ballard is going to change, and that seems like they're setting themselves up for disappointment. 

[Superman]

2 hours ago, Two_pound said:

Yea, I know there were a few years sprinkled in where we had good defense, as I alluded to. The '05 team I believe finished top 3 total defense, then went to the playoffs and looked like they hadn't practiced for 2 months. ( I know that was because of Dungy's family tragedy and you can't hold that against anyone on that team it would have been awful to go through that, real life and family is more important than football). Overall and generally speaking though, in the past 50 years our defense has underperformed and at times downright sucked way to often.

 

The defense wasn't top notch, but the real problem in that 2005 playoff game was the offensive line, IMO. 

 

Generally speaking, I agree with you. The Colts have never been known as having a defensive identity. I think there have been some good years, and some decent years, but I've never felt super confident that our defense would show up in a big game. 

 

2 hours ago, Two_pound said:

And also Superman, just blitzing another 5-8 times a game would make a difference. We have the athletes who would be great blitzers. Speed, Carlies, Simpson, Cross, and Harrison. I would like to see Land stand up and move around to attack the line of scrimmage also, he excelled at that in college.

 

I don't disagree, but Bradley is not going to double his blitz rate, and he's not going to play more man coverage. I'm hoping for simple adjustments that I think have a somewhat reasonable chance of being implemented and succeeding, without asking Bradley to change his entire philosophy and nature as a play caller. 

[BeanDiasucci]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

I don't disagree with the bolded. I think that's basically what Irsay said. But to me, that doesn't translate into thinking that Ballard is going to change the way he does things. I think Ballard has already shown a willingness to take a swing, like he did in 2020. And I view his attempts to trade up in the draft in the same way. 

 

I guess my point is that people keep looking for clues that Ballard is going to change, and that seems like they're setting themselves up for disappointment. 

 

The best chance for change may be if Steichen decides at some point to push for it. 

[krunk]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

The defense wasn't top notch, but the real problem in that 2005 playoff game was the offensive line, IMO. 

 

Generally speaking, I agree with you. The Colts have never been known as having a defensive identity. I think there have been some good years, and some decent years, but I've never felt super confident that our defense would show up in a big game. 

 

 

I don't disagree, but Bradley is not going to double his blitz rate, and he's not going to play more man coverage. I'm hoping for simple adjustments that I think have a somewhat reasonable chance of being implemented and succeeding, without asking Bradley to change his entire philosophy and nature as a play caller. 

I thought he went completely off script against Baltimore. He was blitzing left and right. Would have thought he was Buddy Ryan he sent so many of them after Lamar.

[ColtStrong2013]

26 minutes ago, BeanDiasucci said:

 

The best chance for change may be if Steichen decides at some point to push for it. 

If Steichen sees a need for adding top dollar talent, then he needs to not bite his tongue. He may have better odds than others, but the odds he has many years to win as a head coach isn’t great… Window isn’t big in this league for a coach to win. 

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, krunk said:

I thought he went completely off script against Baltimore. He was blitzing left and right. Would have thought he was Buddy Ryan he sent so many of them after Lamar.

 

Yup. To see Bradley adjust so drastically in the Ravens game, and be so rigid every other game, is pretty frustrating to me. I don't need the Ravens gameplan every week, but adjusting to the opponent would be nice. Varying coverages and employing some disguise would be nice. 

[GoColts8818]

10 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yup. To see Bradley adjust so drastically in the Ravens game, and be so rigid every other game, is pretty frustrating to me. I don't need the Ravens gameplan every week, but adjusting to the opponent would be nice. Varying coverages and employing some disguise would be nice. 

To the latter that’s why I am kinda excited to see if they use Cross and Blackmon interchangeably like they said during the first pre-season broadcast.  That’s probably as close to as disguise as we will see from Bradley sadly.

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

To the latter that’s why I am kinda excited to see if they use Cross and Blackmon interchangeably like they said during the first pre-season broadcast.  That’s probably as close to as disguise as we will see from Bradley sadly.

 

It's always interesting to me how people talk about the safety positions. FS is always seen as the deep safety, and SS is seen as the guy who sometimes plays closer to the LOS, even in the box at times. But SS actually refers to the safety that lines up on the strong side of the offensive formation. So unless a defense plans to shift both the side and the depth of the safeties in response to every pre-snap adjustment by the offense, it's absolutely necessary that your safeties have some interchangeability (is that a word??) The staff might as well lean into it use the versatility of guys like Blackmon (and maybe Cross, guess we'll see on that). 

 

It's a little different when you run a single high scheme like Bradley has been known to do. But unless you have a super rangy eraser at FS -- like Earl Thomas -- it doesn't make sense to create a drastic distinction between the FS and SS. 

 

That said, I'd say 90% of defensive coaches say they want their safeties to be interchangeable. 

[Solid84]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I don't disagree with the bolded. I think that's basically what Irsay said. But to me, that doesn't translate into thinking that Ballard is going to change the way he does things. I think Ballard has already shown a willingness to take a swing, like he did in 2020. And I view his attempts to trade up in the draft in the same way. 

 

I guess my point is that people keep looking for clues that Ballard is going to change, and that seems like they're setting themselves up for disappointment. 

To the bolded: I don't think it does either. I don't think he'll change. My point is what Irsay clearly wants. Ballard can get on board with that or he can get gone.

 

I don't agree Ballard went all in in 2020. Yeah he got us Buckner, which was (and still is) great, but the team still barely scraped into the playoffs with the newly created 7th seat. That's a team with obvious deficiencies in my opinion.

I applauded his attempts to move up. And failing that, I still think we got the best realistic outcome this draft. I still don't think Ballard is fully on board, though. I mean, he wanted to get weapons for AR this draft and I like that. But, we still have some, in my opinion, clear deficiencies on the team which he's not done anything to fix.

 

So, like I said, if AR proves he's our guy Ballard can't sit on his hands.

[shasta519]

22 hours ago, Superman said:

 

This is the same Chris Ballard who traded a first rounder for Buckner and signed him to a top of market contract. He has the capacity to take a big swing, when he thinks the time is right, for the right player. But I think there's this idea that Irsay is going to come in, give him a paddling, and tell him to go spend big right now. And buying into that is just setting yourself up for disappointment, which leads to the annual March Meltdown.

 

Also, the Colts committed a bunch of future money this offseason, and we have Ryan Kelly, Kwity Paye, Dayo, Blackmon, Speed, etc., all hitting free agency in 2025. I expect a similar strategy to this offseason -- keep several of our own FAs, and very few outside additions, if any. 

 

My point is that I don't think Ballard is going to change his roster building strategy, or the underlying philosophies upon which his strategy is built. 

Yep. I am not even sure where the massive swing would come from. The swing/s he took this offseason were prior to re-signing so many of his own players.

 

Right now, they have $14M in cap space for next year. So if they roll over $20M or so, they will $34M in cap. That doesn't go nearly as far as it used to.

 

They've got Dayo, Kelly and Blackmon as UFAs. I assume at least two of those will be back. Then you have the draft.

 

That doesn't leave much and not sure what moves (beyond releasing a couple of his guys) would open up a lot of cap space.

 

I think the contracts given out this offseason point were meant to align with AR's potential second deal, but also a 2-3 year window of contention with basically this roster (plus draft classes). 

[richard pallo]

23 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

Yep. I am not even sure where the massive swing would come from. The swing/s he took this offseason were prior to re-signing so many of his own players.

 

Right now, they have $14M in cap space for next year. So if they roll over $20M or so, they will $34M in cap. That doesn't go nearly as far as it used to.

 

They've got Dayo, Kelly and Blackmon as UFAs. I assume at least two of those will be back. Then you have the draft.

 

That doesn't leave much and not sure what moves (beyond releasing a couple of his guys) would open up a lot of cap space.

 

I think the contracts given out this offseason point were meant to align with AR's potential second deal, but also a 2-3 year window of contention with basically this roster (plus draft classes). 

I think if there’s one thing the Colts do well it is manage cap space.  I’m not concerned at all on that front.

[Superman]

7 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

Yep. I am not even sure where the massive swing would come from. The swing/s he took this offseason were prior to re-signing so many of his own players.

 

Right now, they have $14M in cap space for next year. So if they roll over $20M or so, they will $34M in cap. That doesn't go nearly as far as it used to.

 

They've got Dayo, Kelly and Blackmon as UFAs. I assume at least two of those will be back. Then you have the draft.

 

That doesn't leave much and not sure what moves (beyond releasing a couple of his guys) would open up a lot of cap space.

 

I think the contracts given out this offseason point were meant to align with AR's potential second deal, but also a 2-3 year window of contention with basically this roster (plus draft classes). 

 

I think they'll have more cap space than you expect. It looks like you're using OTC's projection, which I think is very conservative at $260m in 2025. Spotrac is at $273m. The cap went up by nearly 14% this year, and if that repeats, we could be close to $290m in 2025. I think Spotrac's projection is safe. That would have the Colts at $30m before any rollover, and I think $15m is safe, assuming no big moves are on the way for the Colts. 

 

Still, like you said, $45m doesn't go that far, and you didn't even mention Paye, who will hopefully be in line for a nice deal after this year. Add in Dayo and Blackmon, and the $45m is gone. 

 

Things could always change, they could find a way to get a deal done if they wanted. My main point though is I don't think Irsay is going to force Ballard to take a big swing. 

[Solid84]

This touches on some of the things we've discussed here regarding Bradley - predictability.

[BeanDiasucci]

36 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

This touches on some of the things we've discussed here regarding Bradley - predictability.

That's a remarkable chart. It shows the Colts with average pass coverage efficiency while having by far the most predictable coverage scheme in the NFL. And look at the teams that had high pass coverage efficiency and very low coverage predictability - the Chiefs, Lions, and 49ers. 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Solid84 said:

This touches on some of the things we've discussed here regarding Bradley - predictability.

 

Goodness...

 

Dan Quinn comes from the same line, basically he was part of Bradley's tree, and the Cowboys ran a bunch of zone under Quinn. Yet, the Cowboys were far less predictable in 2023. 

[shasta519]

7 hours ago, richard pallo said:

I think if there’s one thing the Colts do well it is manage cap space.  I’m not concerned at all on that front.

Yeah. I am not concerned about cap space, moreso that it doesn’t point a big move. We haven’t seen Ballard make those types of signings, so it just seems even less likely with what’s already committed. 

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, Solid84 said:

This touches on some of the things we've discussed here regarding Bradley - predictability.

 

I like charts. I think they show a lot, and my Lord... Rarely do you see something like this in professional sports. Surely this moves towards the center this year. At least some? Haha. I mean, this is, as @BeanDiasucci put it best, remarkable.

[shasta519]

5 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think they'll have more cap space than you expect. It looks like you're using OTC's projection, which I think is very conservative at $260m in 2025. Spotrac is at $273m. The cap went up by nearly 14% this year, and if that repeats, we could be close to $290m in 2025. I think Spotrac's projection is safe. That would have the Colts at $30m before any rollover, and I think $15m is safe, assuming no big moves are on the way for the Colts. 

 

Still, like you said, $45m doesn't go that far, and you didn't even mention Paye, who will hopefully be in line for a nice deal after this year. Add in Dayo and Blackmon, and the $45m is gone. 

 

Things could always change, they could find a way to get a deal done if they wanted. My main point though is I don't think Irsay is going to force Ballard to take a big swing. 

Agree. I don’t think there’s any pressure. Irsay hasn’t done that. 
 

I think Paye is already on the 5th year option next year, so I am not sure how much impact it will have. Says it’s $13.8M. Suppose they could re-sign him and push some cap into the future. 
 

I think people expecting big moves will be disappointed. Trades to get proven missing pieces might be likely though. 

[Solid84]

8 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I like charts. I think they show a lot, and my Lord... Rarely do you see something like this in professional sports. Surely this moves towards the center this year. At least some? Haha. I mean, this is, as @BeanDiasucci put it best, remarkable.

IIRC Ballard talked about using more disguises (or was it coverage types?) this offseason. Can’t find the tweet though. Hope we at least try and gove our DBs a fighting chance. 

[ColtStrong2013]

3 hours ago, Solid84 said:

This touches on some of the things we've discussed here regarding Bradley - predictability.

also- this chart actually explains why the colts expects to improve with what they have while teams like the eagles and titans made a lot of moves to shore up the secondary. 

[Solid84]

Just now, ColtStrong2013 said:

also- this chart actually explains why the colts expects to improve with what they have while teams like the eagles and titans made a lot of moves to shore up the secondary. 

A lot of the Colts’ improvements will depend on whether or not Bradley actually gets more creative, though.  
 

I hope he does, because I feel it could help our DBs a lot. 🤞

[ColtStrong2013]

19 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

A lot of the Colts’ improvements will depend on whether or not Bradley actually gets more creative, though.  
 

I hope he does, because I feel it could help our DBs a lot. 🤞

It could. But just basing improvement on that chart, a more consistent pass rush, and a young group that gets better could do it too. Meaning keeping the exact same level of predictability, what can actually improve the vertical axis? 
 

not that the chart is what any of them are basing off, but I can imagine their own analytics probably show similar findings. 

[NewColtsFan]

38 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

also- this chart actually explains why the colts expects to improve with what they have while teams like the eagles and titans made a lot of moves to shore up the secondary. 

I always hate charts like this!  I never know what they mean and where on the chart is good and where is bad?   
 

But I see the Colts waaaayyy to the left all by themselves on the horizontal line.   Is this good or bad?  
 

Would someone like to explain it to me like I’m a 6-year old?   Ok, maybe 7!   😉 

 

[RollerColt]

17 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I always hate charts like this!  I never know what they mean and where on the chart is good and where is bad?   
 

But I see the Colts waaaayyy to the left all by themselves on the horizontal line.   Is this good or bad?  
 

Would someone like to explain it to me like I’m a 6-year old?   Ok, maybe 7!   😉 

 

Basically, every time we sent our defensive unit on the field last year everyone on the opposing team down to the grandmas of the players knew what our coverages were. And yet somehow we were okay enough to be average in defending the pass.

 

It’s… unprecedented.

[RollerColt]

I will add: having so many injuries last year probably contributed to using basic schemes.

[Superman]

18 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I always hate charts like this!  I never know what they mean and where on the chart is good and where is bad?   
 

But I see the Colts waaaayyy to the left all by themselves on the horizontal line.   Is this good or bad?  
 

Would someone like to explain it to me like I’m a 6-year old?   Ok, maybe 7!   😉 

 

I wanted to come back to this, because you're right. The chart is eye-catching -- especially with the Colts over there on an island in the middle of the ocean like that -- but it's lacking important context and information, IMO. 

 

The vertical axis is pretty clear. They're using EPA (expected points added, a complicated but respected metric) per pass attempt, to judge the efficiency (or quality) of the pass defense. That's easy enough to get. The Colts rank dead center in EPA per pass attempt. We all knew the Colts were a statistically average pass defense last season. (What troubles many of us is that we played a soft schedule with bad QBs, and were still only average.)

 

But the horizontal axis is more questionable, to me. They're using an analysis to judge the predictability of each team's pass coverages -- is the defense more predictable, or is it more 'mixed up'? I don't know the analysis or its methodology, and have no way to judge whether it's legitimate or reliable. But that analysis concludes that the Colts have the most predictable pass coverages in the NFL, by far. Which is why they're on an island on this chart.

 

So while I'd like to understand the analysis better, it reaches the same conclusion I've suspected all along: the Colts pass coverages are incredibly predictable. I've mentioned several times that the Colts run Cover 3/4 more than 70% of the time, and with little disguise. I'm a little surprised to see the Colts as such an outlier (for example, the Colts ran Cover 3 57%, while the Panthers ran Cover 3 53%, but the Panthers are dead center for predictability, so I'd like to understand the methodology of this analysis). But I'm not surprised at the conclusion that the Colts defense is highly predictable. I've been saying this myself since last season.

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

I will add: having so many injuries last year probably contributed to using basic schemes.

 

I have a problem with this conclusion. I'd understand shying away from more aggressive and demanding coverages, Cover 0, Cover 1. Even Cover 6, which can be complicated (but not really, IMO). But we ran 6% Cover 2. Our DBs don't know Cover 2 well enough to use it more than 6% of the time? 

 

All these percentages are based on this chart, by the way.