Taking Taylor off the field

[Hoose]

It’s also possible that Shane is sending a message to JT: I’m not playing you in crucial situations if you don’t block. That’s a tough lesson to teach, especially in a game like last Sunday. But benching Taylor when he did makes more sense if there’s a message being sent than just wanting to give the backups a chance. 

[ProblChld32]

15 hours ago, DalTXColtsFan said:

I'm sure this got discussed but I felt like it deserved its own thread.

 

Game 17 last year.  We need a TD to make the playoffs.  Taylor is not on the field.

 

Game 2 this year.  We need a TD to win the game.  Taylor is not on the field.

 

Help me understand the wisdom in not having your BEST PLAYER on the field in critical situations.

I get the logic behind it , but imo the WRONG player was in the field it shouldn’t have been Sermon, he isn’t that good of a pass catcher. It should have been Goodson. I do agree that having you BEST weapon on the field during times like that. But JT had been making some bad plays, the bad drop (more so on AR than JT but you gotta catch those) and the fumble. I just don’t under understand why Goodson wasn’t in if we are in a clear passing situation. Goodson is the better receiver out of the two.

[Goatface Killah]

4 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

I get the logic behind it , but imo the WRONG player was in the field it shouldn’t have been Sermon, he isn’t that good of a pass catcher. It should have been Goodson. I do agree that having you BEST weapon on the field during times like that. But JT had been making some bad plays, the bad drop (more so on AR than JT but you gotta catch those) and the fumble. I just don’t under understand why Goodson wasn’t in if we are in a clear passing situation. Goodson is the better receiver out of the two.

What are you basing this on?

 

Goodson has literally never made a play in the passing game and had a HUGE drop that cost us a division title and a playoff spot. 

 

He had 1 catch for a whopping 2 yards in that game and JT had 2 catches for 32. 

 

 

[DavePSL]

13 hours ago, Hoose said:

It’s also possible that Shane is sending a message to JT: I’m not playing you in crucial situations if you don’t block. That’s a tough lesson to teach, especially in a game like last Sunday. But benching Taylor when he did makes more sense if there’s a message being sent than just wanting to give the backups a chance. 

if we made up a list of players that SS should be holding accountable buy benching them fo rthe 4th quarter, JT woudl be at the bottom....SS is trying to force AR to be a franchise QB and carry the team and if it doesn't stop, he and Ballard will ruin AR . This teams problems come down to an over evaluation of talent by Ballard, SS and Bradley. The question is, does SS and Gus really believe these players are good or are they playing the company line. I used to think it was the company line nonsense but now after the ridiculous decisions Gus and SS made last weekend by playing bad players at critical times , I think they now really have no clue how to evaluate talent.....EVEN WITH IT BEING ON TAPE. Dont cut yourselves short fans, believe what your eyes tell you and dont let them tell you some nonsense about coaches tape. Parcells said it best. "You are what your record says you are" and right now the Colts are a bad football team and nobody is immune. NOT SS, Gus, Ballard, or the players....Remember Ballard's argument about culture in tough times....If this team loses to the Bears at home, this team is going to implode.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

8 hours ago, Goatface Killah said:

What are you basing this on?

 

Goodson has literally never made a play in the passing game and had a HUGE drop that cost us a division title and a playoff spot. 

 

He had 1 catch for a whopping 2 yards in that game and JT had 2 catches for 32. 

 

 

Taylor had 500 yards receiving when Carson was here. So him not being a pass catching back is just silly.

[GoColts8818]

14 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

I get the logic behind it , but imo the WRONG player was in the field it shouldn’t have been Sermon, he isn’t that good of a pass catcher. It should have been Goodson. I do agree that having you BEST weapon on the field during times like that. But JT had been making some bad plays, the bad drop (more so on AR than JT but you gotta catch those) and the fumble. I just don’t under understand why Goodson wasn’t in if we are in a clear passing situation. Goodson is the better receiver out of the two.

Goodson career numbers catching the ball 7 receptions for 36 yards.  Let’s slow the roll on the idea he’s some amazing pass catching back.  For perspective Taylor 125 catches for 987 yards.  Taylor does just fine catching the ball.  He had two catches for 32 yards on Sunday alone.  He literally almost matched godson’s career yardage mark on two catches in one game.

[ProblChld32]

5 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Goodson career numbers catching the ball 7 receptions for 36 yards.  Let’s slow the roll on the idea he’s some amazing pass catching back.  For perspective Taylor 125 catches for 987 yards.  Taylor does just fine catching the ball.  He had two catches for 32 yards on Sunday alone.  He literally almost matched godson’s career yardage mark on two catches in one game.

I’ve never once said that Goodson was an amazing pass catcher. I simply said I get the logic behind them wanting a receiver type back but didn’t understand why they went with Sermon instead of Goodson. You guys need to slow your roll on assuming. 

[ProblChld32]

9 hours ago, Goatface Killah said:

What are you basing this on?

 

Goodson has literally never made a play in the passing game and had a HUGE drop that cost us a division title and a playoff spot. 

 

He had 1 catch for a whopping 2 yards in that game and JT had 2 catches for 32. 

 

 

Shane literally said in his presser that it was a passing situation since they were down so much which is why Taylor wasn’t on the field in the fourth so THATS what I’m basing this off of. I simply questioned why was Sermon on the field instead of Goodson if that was indeed the case because they’ve literally said that Goodson is a pass catching back and Sermon is more of a power back between the tackles guy. So it didn’t make sense that he would be on the field instead of Goodson. 

[GoColts8818]

11 minutes ago, ProblChld32 said:

I’ve never once said that Goodson was an amazing pass catcher. I simply said I get the logic behind them wanting a receiver type back but didn’t understand why they went with Sermon instead of Goodson. You guys need to slow your roll on assuming. 

My point is there is nothing in Goodson’s NFL career history to suggest he’s a receiving back or even better at than Taylor is.  

[Blueblood23]

1 hour ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Taylor had 500 yards receiving when Carson was here. So him not being a pass catching back is just silly.

Sure doesn’t play like a pass catching back currently. Maybe that was why he was benched. 

[DavePSL]

6 minutes ago, Blueblood23 said:

Sure doesn’t play like a pass catching back currently. Maybe that was why he was benched. 

If JT is NOT a "pass catching Rb now" what does that say about our pass cacthing wr's who all had less yards than JT, except AP?

 

Say this out loud people. SS benched our leading rb in rushing yards, and really only offensive threat, and 2nd leading receiver in yards in the most critical time of the game for the backup RB's. Again, if the national media gets a hold of this or cared, they would blast SS to hell for it because it was a RIDICULOUS stategy!

[compuls1v3]

On 9/16/2024 at 2:15 PM, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I think reporters asked some good questions today. I do like the questions on Taylor and Chappell on AR. Maybe we will see some changes on offense.

 

 

Wow.  I'm not sure if I am remembering this right, but this seems some of the best questioning I've seen from the media in a long time.  I really like the guy talking about why JT didn't have any touches in the fourth quarter, and why he wasn't in there on the 3 and 2? play, that was a terrible toss play.   Not sure who that reporter was but I liked his line of questioning.

[Goatface Killah]

4 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

Shane literally said in his presser that it was a passing situation since they were down so much which is why Taylor wasn’t on the field in the fourth so THATS what I’m basing this off of. I simply questioned why was Sermon on the field instead of Goodson if that was indeed the case because they’ve literally said that Goodson is a pass catching back and Sermon is more of a power back between the tackles guy. So it didn’t make sense that he would be on the field instead of Goodson. 

None of it makes sense. Goodson has like 7 catches for no yards, so calling him a pass catching back is crazy.

 

What he is, is a 3rd string RB who isnt very good.

 

No way he should play over Taylor in any situation. 

 

[Goatface Killah]

5 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Taylor had 500 yards receiving when Carson was here. So him not being a pass catching back is just silly.

He isnt Christian McCafferey, but when he has the ball in the open field he is very dangerous.

 

What happened Sunday was Taylor missed a block and dropped a pass and Shane tricked himself into thinking it was a good idea to take his best player out, despite the fact he was playing very well and use 2 guys who I have literally never seen make a single play that has impressed me, ever. 

 

They should have to earn the right to be in the game in the 4th quarter by making plays when they get opportunities earlier in the game. They arent doing that and are just being handed the keys without earning it. 

 

Honestly I feel like Shane should be taking more heat than he is. He did this exact thing in the Texans game last year. Taylor was destroying them and he took him out and put in Goodson.

 

It made no sense then and it made no sense last week.

 

 

[OLD FAN MAN]

6 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Taylor had 500 yards receiving when Carson was here. So him not being a pass catching back is just silly.

taylor is getting game changer money, why not see if he can change the game? does shane over manage?

[Tsarquise]

I trust Steichen. 

[rockywoj]

A good offensive coordinator would go out of his way to scheme getting the ball into JT’s hands in the open field.  No player on the Colts is as dangerous as JT with the ball in their hands.  I’d go so far as to say I am hard pressed to name a Colts player EVER that is more dangerous with the ball in their hands than JT.  I find it mind boggling that a team has a game changing star, but proceeds in such a lackadaisical manner in utilizing him.

 

Yeah, he might whiff a reception here or there, but that is simply the price you pay.  Scheme in more plays in a more effective way to get JT in space with the ball, often.  And guess what then? Defences will start concentrating on trying to shut JT down.  And then guess what?  The offence will open up for other players. It’s not rocket science!

 

Like earlier said by others, and by me, JT ought not EVER be taken off the field unless he’s in dire need of a breather or injured or a game is entirely out of reach one way or the other, especially in critical moments!  SS’s excuse was utter bee ess, wanted to give some backup Jag some reps, my gawd! <face palm>
 

I’m not going to write Steichen off just yet, but this last game was a MAJOR bloody strike in my books.  He is definitely in need of redeeming himself.

 

And one last thought … if I were that reporter that asked about JT being taken out on that critical 3rd down and then for too much of the last quarter, I’d have immediately followed up on Steichen’s answer asking, let me get this straight, you took out the Colts most dynamic offensive game changer to give an unaccomplished backup some reps!? And you took out your most dynamic player because you wanted to concentrating on a passing games with a bunch of, so far, scrubs?  Ooooookay then.

[ProblChld32]

7 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

My point is there is nothing in Goodson’s NFL career history to suggest he’s a receiving back or even better at than Taylor is.  

Take that up with HC Shane those were his words on Goodson being a pass catching back. There are things that guys did well on a collegiate level that may suggest that they have some experience in that area. Collegiately he has more catches and receiving yards than JT. Obviously he hasn’t had any where near the amount of snaps JT has had at the NFL level so I’m not saying that he is a better receiving back than JT. My point still stands if Goodson is the better receiving back between he and Sermon why was he not on the field during a passing situation? I’m not here to go back and fourth with you about JT not being on the field. Shane already made it be known why he was not on the field, his use of personnel just doesn’t support that stance.

[ProblChld32]

3 hours ago, Goatface Killah said:

None of it makes sense. Goodson has like 7 catches for no yards, so calling him a pass catching back is crazy.

 

What he is, is a 3rd string RB who isnt very good.

 

No way he should play over Taylor in any situation. 

 

Please tell this to HC Shane Steichen , he’s the one that gave Goodson this title of a pass catching back. Not sure why you’re trying to argue me down about why JT wasn’t on the field. I not once never said that JT shouldn’t have been on the field. I believe he is a home run threat every-time he touches the ball and when you have a guy of that caliber they should be playing. 
 

There is speculation that it could have been because JT blocked poorly but Shane denied that being the case. 

From the Indy Star

head coach Shane Steichen said Monday it was because they were trailing and needed to pass, and the offense wasn't targeting Taylor in the passing game.

 

When asked if the decision involved Taylor's pass protection, Steichen said: "No, not necessarily. Not necessarily. We wanted to give Trey some reps in there. That was it."
 

My point still remains true If they’re in a clear passing scenario and you’re not planning on playing JT why would you not have the better pass catcher between the two out of Sermon and Goodson on the field. Everything you’re arguing about JT not being on the field is irrelevant because Shane pulled him and obviously had ZERO intentions of playing him in the 4th as he saw not 1 snap in the 4th. QTR. As for you saying none it makes sense I will absolutely agree with you because his decision to use Sermon in a clear passing situation doesn’t make sense at all.

[ProblChld32]

2 hours ago, rockywoj said:

A good offensive coordinator would go out of his way to scheme getting the ball into JT’s hands in the open field.  No player on the Colts is as dangerous as JT with the ball in their hands.  I’d go so far as to say I am hard pressed to name a Colts player EVER that is more dangerous with the ball in their hands than JT.

Colts players that were as dangerous if not more dangerous with the ball in their hands.

Edgerrin James 

 

Marshall Faulk

 

Don’t get me wrong , JT is a good player but these guys are Hall of Famers for a reason.

[Goatface Killah]

9 minutes ago, ProblChld32 said:

Please tell this to HC Shane Steichen , he’s the one that gave Goodson this title of a pass catching back. Not sure why you’re trying to argue me down about why JT wasn’t on the field. I not once never said that JT shouldn’t have been on the field. I believe he is a home run threat every-time he touches the ball and when you have a guy of that caliber they should be playing. 
 

There is speculation that it could have been because JT blocked poorly but Shane denied that being the case. 

From the Indy Star

head coach Shane Steichen said Monday it was because they were trailing and needed to pass, and the offense wasn't targeting Taylor in the passing game.

 

When asked if the decision involved Taylor's pass protection, Steichen said: "No, not necessarily. Not necessarily. We wanted to give Trey some reps in there. That was it."
 

My point still remains true If they’re in a clear passing scenario and you’re not planning on playing JT why would you not have the better pass catcher between the two out of Sermon and Goodson on the field. Everything you’re arguing about JT not being on the field is irrelevant because Shane pulled him and obviously had ZERO intentions of playing him in the 4th as he saw not 1 snap in the 4th. QTR. As for you saying none it makes sense I will absolutely agree with you because his decision to use Sermon in a clear passing situation doesn’t make sense at all.

Its not directed at you, Im just voicing my frustration with the logic behind his decision.

[rockywoj]

5 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

Colts players that were as dangerous if not more dangerous with the ball in their hands.

Edgerrin James 

 

Marshall Faulk

 

Don’t get me wrong , JT is a good player but these guys are Hall of Famers for a reason.

They were indeed great players, but honestly, so far from what I’ve seen, JT seems to me that he is even more of a break the play for a huge gainer than either of those HOF players you named.  Time will tell whether JT will himself turn into a HOF candidate, but his ability to break the play open as a home run threat, to me, it’s thus far unmatched.

[DougDew]

17 hours ago, DavePSL said:

The question is, does SS and Gus really believe these players are good or are they playing the company line.

I always felt that an element to Frank/Flus and now maybe Shane/Gus was that they see limitations in the players they have to work with, which limited their desire to coach more un-vanilla.   When you hear Frank say that he wanted "two dawg WRs and a TE", and now the Bears getting praise for their defense while running the same basic scheme, I wonder if they though they needed better talent here to coach the way they really wanted to.  Of course, they would never say that if they felt that way.

 

 

7 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

My point still remains true If they’re in a clear passing scenario and you’re not planning on playing JT why would you not have the better pass catcher between the two out of Sermon and Goodson on the field. Everything you’re arguing about JT not being on the field is irrelevant because Shane pulled him and obviously had ZERO intentions of playing him in the 4th as he saw not 1 snap in the 4th. QTR. As for you saying none it makes sense I will absolutely agree with you because his decision to use Sermon in a clear passing situation doesn’t make sense at all.

JT was in the first drive of the 4Q, which resulted in the bad option call (to Sermon) and a missed FG.  The Colts then had it for two passing plays before AR threw the interception.  In the intervening GB possessions, they scored two FGs and ran 9 minutes off the clock.  So this notion of singling out JT for not being on the field in the 4Q is an exaggeration, because the entire offense was barely on the field in the last 12 minutes of the 4Q thanks to bad QB play and bad defense. 

 

I think coaches just see JT as not a good fit for the passing game.  They may be wrong, but they see his skills being limited when they are down two TDs with 4 minutes left.  No coach at any level of football is going to call many running plays in that situation, despite what the RB did during the game.  In that case, JT vs Sermon vs Goodson? meh, big deal.

 

We had the ball for about 7 minutes of the 4Q, and GB about 9.  3minutes of our time was the first drive where JT ran well but it ended in the missed FG,  The last 4 minutes JT was not on the field, but that was when we scored our only TD.  So are you complaining that JT was not on the field during our only TD drive of the game?...or complaining that he was not on the field in the very last drive of the game?   The "entire 4Q" line doesn't seem to be the problem.

[chad72]

It is just different being the top dog and not an OC. Steichen is still having growing pains along with AR, IMO. But I have confidence that they both will figure it out.

 

JT is not a back who can catch with his back to the ball and track it in the air type of RB in the passing game (RB that can play like a WR). Otherwise, he is just as good as any other pass catching RB on our roster, IMO, given the small sample sets of RB passes thrown in our offense.

 

We don't have a James White or Sproles or even Nyheim Hines type pass catching RB on this roster, unless there is someone I don't know about, because he hasn't been showcased. Until that happens, we just need to roll with the best we have, which is JT.

[DougDew]

4 minutes ago, chad72 said:

It is just different being the top dog and not an OC. Steichen is still having growing pains along with AR, IMO. But I have confidence that they both will figure it out.

 

JT is not a back who can catch with his back to the ball and track it in the air type of RB in the passing game (RB that can play like a WR). Otherwise, he is just as good as any other pass catching RB on our roster, IMO, given the small sample sets of RB passes thrown in our offense.

 

We don't have a James White or Sproles or even Nyheim Hines type pass catching RB on this roster, unless there is someone I don't know about, because he hasn't been showcased. Until that happens, we just need to roll with the best we have, which is JT.

I agree with all of this. 

 

I think folks are ignoring the fact that when we were running in the 4Q, JT was there, and when the game got reduced to a pure passing quick-catch up game, it doesn't really matter what RB is in the game, because as you pointed out, they are all about the same.

 

So maybe the real beef is that folks think we should have been running the ball during the last drive instead of just passing?  Which is a weird complaint because we just scored our first TD of the game the drive before by following Shane's strategy.

 

Oh well. the wonders of the forum.

[chad72]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I agree with all of this. 

 

I think folks are ignoring the fact that when we were running in the 4Q, JT was there, and when the game got reduced to a pure passing quick-catch up game, it doesn't really matter what RB is in the game, because as you pointed out, they are all about the same.

 

So maybe the real beef is that folks think we should have been running the ball during the last drive instead of just passing?  Which is a weird complaint because we just scored our first TD of the game the drive before by following Shane's strategy.

 

Oh well. the wonders of the forum.

 

To me, it wouldn't have mattered because just having JT there is not going to give us an extra oomph because they knew the clock was against us and we had to push the ball and not dink and dunk to our RBs. Plus, I don't know what it is with our offense, we just do not run screen passes to our RBs to slow down pass rushes, not sure if it is the OL abilities or the abilities of the RBs on our roster? If we are not dinking and dunking to our RBs, and not running screen passes anyways, not a HUGE deal to me not having JT there. 

[SOMDColtsfan]

Thats how we roll. We like to keep em guessing! 

[Solid84]

2 hours ago, chad72 said:

It is just different being the top dog and not an OC. Steichen is still having growing pains along with AR, IMO. But I have confidence that they both will figure it out.

 

JT is not a back who can catch with his back to the ball and track it in the air type of RB in the passing game (RB that can play like a WR). Otherwise, he is just as good as any other pass catching RB on our roster, IMO, given the small sample sets of RB passes thrown in our offense.

 

We don't have a James White or Sproles or even Nyheim Hines type pass catching RB on this roster, unless there is someone I don't know about, because he hasn't been showcased. Until that happens, we just need to roll with the best we have, which is JT.

I thought pass catching was one of Hull's strengths which is why I thought it weird we kept both Goodson and Sermon.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Taylor had 500 yards receiving in 21. It’s a false claim he can’t catch. He had more recording yards than sermon in this game too. Plus anytime he has the ball in his hands he is a threat to score no matter where we are on the field.

[ProblChld32]

4 hours ago, DougDew said:

I always felt that an element to Frank/Flus and now maybe Shane/Gus was that they see limitations in the players they have to work with, which limited their desire to coach more un-vanilla.   When you hear Frank say that he wanted "two dawg WRs and a TE", and now the Bears getting praise for their defense while running the same basic scheme, I wonder if they though they needed better talent here to coach the way they really wanted to.  Of course, they would never say that if they felt that way.

 

 

JT was in the first drive of the 4Q, which resulted in the bad option call (to Sermon) and a missed FG.  The Colts then had it for two passing plays before AR threw the interception.  In the intervening GB possessions, they scored two FGs and ran 9 minutes off the clock.  So this notion of singling out JT for not being on the field in the 4Q is an exaggeration, because the entire offense was barely on the field in the last 12 minutes of the 4Q thanks to bad QB play and bad defense. 

 

I think coaches just see JT as not a good fit for the passing game.  They may be wrong, but they see his skills being limited when they are down two TDs with 4 minutes left.  No coach at any level of football is going to call many running plays in that situation, despite what the RB did during the game.  In that case, JT vs Sermon vs Goodson? meh, big deal.

 

We had the ball for about 7 minutes of the 4Q, and GB about 9.  3minutes of our time was the first drive where JT ran well but it ended in the missed FG,  The last 4 minutes JT was not on the field, but that was when we scored our only TD.  So are you complaining that JT was not on the field during our only TD drive of the game?...or complaining that he was not on the field in the very last drive of the game?   The "entire 4Q" line doesn't seem to be the problem.

I’m not complaining about JT period and that’s what a lot of you posters who are commenting fail to realize. My gripe is with SHANE. If you scroll through the thread and read my replies I said if Shane’s logic for not having JT on the field was because it was a passing scenario ie. We are down and ideally need to throw the ball then why was Sermon on the field? It didn’t make sense. My point literally had nothing to do with JT it’s about what Shane is saying to the media versus what’s he’s actually doing in game. 

[ShuteAt168]

On 9/16/2024 at 4:26 PM, cdgacoltsfan said:

Shane seems to be the younger, taller version of Frank so far. Neither played situational football and no matter where they are or were on the field, instead of punting and pinning them back, we go for it and never make it. Shane handed the Packers 3 pts yesterday by going for it on 4th and 4 at our 45....early in the 3rd qtr. Unreal.

Yeah, that doesn’t seem to have gotten much attention. Strange. 

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, ProblChld32 said:

I’m not complaining about JT period and that’s what a lot of you posters who are commenting fail to realize. My gripe is with SHANE. If you scroll through the thread and read my replies I said if Shane’s logic for not having JT on the field was because it was a passing scenario ie. We are down and ideally need to throw the ball then why was Sermon on the field? It didn’t make sense. My point literally had nothing to do with JT it’s about what Shane is saying to the media versus what’s he’s actually doing in game. 

So you are commenting about the sincerity of what he said in his presser?  I may have addressed that with my first post, but I can't be sure. 

 

I would say his sincerity is probably no different than most coaches' sincerity in their presser's, but maybe Shane's insincerity in this instance is a bit less sincere than most coaches' insincere explanations most of the time.

[Moosejawcolt]

9 minutes ago, DougDew said:

So you are commenting about the sincerity of what he said in his presser?  I may have addressed that with my first post, but I can't be sure. 

 

I would say his sincerity is probably no different than most coaches' sincerity in their presser's, but maybe Shane's insincerity in this instance is a bit less sincere than most coaches' insincere explanations most of the time.

Supposedly Shane was on board with extending Taylor. I was  surprised by this because of the approach they used in Philly. I think SS sitting Taylor is an indictment of the extension. How can  your supposed best player be on the bench when it matters most?. It says a lot about Taylor's skill set and why I was opposed to the extension.

[rockywoj]

Excerpt from an article at NFL.com …

 

 

”… One player the Colts can lean on while Richardson gets his sea legs: running back Jonathan Taylor. After last year's hold-in and injury issues, the star running back looks back to his old self. JT bursts through the line like a Mustang on fire, leaving linebackers in his wake. On Sunday, Taylor totaled 12 carries for 103 yards and +55 rushing yards over expected, his most RYOE in a game since Week 15 of 2021. He also forced five missed tackles across 14 touches. 

 

Shane Steichen's decision to bench the star back during the entire fourth quarter because the Colts were in pass mode belies credibility. Even if Taylor isn't a prolific pass catcher out of the backfield, sitting your best offensive weapon for an entire quarter is folly -- hopefully one Steichen doesn't repeat. If defenses are going to sit back to slow Richardson's deep attack, Taylor should gobble up chunk gains. 

 

At this point, Taylor is the most consistent thing going for Indy. The 25-year-old back owns a game-changing gear and can shoulder a massive load. His presence and production should help settle Richardson down during the roller-coaster dips. Taylor hasn't looked fully healthy in a couple of years. He did this past Sunday. The Colts need to ride that stallion.”

 

 

The above referenced article kind of echoes my feelings on the matter.

 

 

[rockywoj]

2 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Supposedly Shane was on board with extending Taylor. I was  surprised by this because of the approach they used in Philly. I think SS sitting Taylor is an indictment of the extension. How can  your supposed best player be on the bench when it matters most?. It says a lot about Taylor's skill set and why I was opposed to the extension.

Oh contrare, I’d say it says more about Shane Steichen’s skill set as a coach.

[OLD FAN MAN]

16 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

Please tell this to HC Shane Steichen , he’s the one that gave Goodson this title of a pass catching back. Not sure why you’re trying to argue me down about why JT wasn’t on the field. I not once never said that JT shouldn’t have been on the field. I believe he is a home run threat every-time he touches the ball and when you have a guy of that caliber they should be playing. 
 

There is speculation that it could have been because JT blocked poorly but Shane denied that being the case. 

From the Indy Star

head coach Shane Steichen said Monday it was because they were trailing and needed to pass, and the offense wasn't targeting Taylor in the passing game.

 

When asked if the decision involved Taylor's pass protection, Steichen said: "No, not necessarily. Not necessarily. We wanted to give Trey some reps in there. That was it."
 

My point still remains true If they’re in a clear passing scenario and you’re not planning on playing JT why would you not have the better pass catcher between the two out of Sermon and Goodson on the field. Everything you’re arguing about JT not being on the field is irrelevant because Shane pulled him and obviously had ZERO intentions of playing him in the 4th as he saw not 1 snap in the 4th. QTR. As for you saying none it makes sense I will absolutely agree with you because his decision to use Sermon in a clear passing situation doesn’t make sense at all.

imo shane tends to over manage at times, just let them play basic football

[DougDew]

3 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Supposedly Shane was on board with extending Taylor. I was  surprised by this because of the approach they used in Philly. I think SS sitting Taylor is an indictment of the extension. How can  your supposed best player be on the bench when it matters most?. It says a lot about Taylor's skill set and why I was opposed to the extension.

I don't know what being on board with the extension means, its not very revealing.  I'm not commenting on Shane's like for JT,  I think he's just fine with JT as his RB.   I just mean that from a team politics point of view, the new HC can't make his first major decision saying he doesn't want to extend the team's only star.  So I'm not surprised he said that he was on board with it.  Again, no sarcasm in that from me because he probably is fine with JT, I'm just looking at it from how it would look if the new coach said anything else other than being on board with the team extending its star.

[DougDew]

8 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

To me, it wouldn't have mattered because just having JT there is not going to give us an extra oomph because they knew the clock was against us and we had to push the ball and not dink and dunk to our RBs. Plus, I don't know what it is with our offense, we just do not run screen passes to our RBs to slow down pass rushes, not sure if it is the OL abilities or the abilities of the RBs on our roster? If we are not dinking and dunking to our RBs, and not running screen passes anyways, not a HUGE deal to me not having JT there. 

I think the intensity within this whole issue is providing a bit of cover for ARs performance, or at least the passing games' performance.  An assumption that JT busts off a 20 yard chunk play that the passing game can't produce (or GB having to account for that possibility), and its somehow Shane's fault for not seeing that opportunity and not having JT in there.

 

IMO, when a team is not getting chunk plays it needs, its not a RB issue, its a QB issue.