Kevin Thomas

[TKnight24]

Our CBs weren't asked to be cover corners they were asked to be sure tacklers and good red zone defenders so of course our CBs going to be on the middle to bottom half of the list

Finally someone who understands a Tampa 2 Defense. With the NEW 3-4, our Cb's WILL be asked to get Physical. No More 8, 10, 12 Yd Cushion that we USED to Give. It's going to get Physical & Maybe even a Few CB Blitzes. And if they don't like it or can't handle it, I'm sure Pagano won't Hesitate to CUT Them. This year, it's ALL about who the "Next Man Up" is. This is the Year for people to Prove that they want to wear a HorseShoe on their Helmet

[Superman]

Finally someone who understands a Tampa 2 Defense. With the NEW 3-4, our Cb's WILL be asked to get Physical. No More 8, 10, 12 Yd Cushion that we USED to Give. It's going to get Physical & Maybe even a Few CB Blitzes. And if they don't like it or can't handle it, I'm sure Pagano won't Hesitate to CUT Them. This year, it's ALL about who the "Next Man Up" is. This is the Year for people to Prove that they want to wear a HorseShoe on their Helmet

I'll say two things: 1) I think Rucker will fit the new scheme nicely, because he's a nice physical corner.

2) We will in fact see cushions on the outside. Not the way we used to, but cushions have a place in every defensive scheme.

[GoColts8818]

Nevis is already working at the starting right defensive end opposite Redding

Cool last I had heard fili had been moved at there

[Andy]

To add on to that Jerraud Powers was 63rd in the league, giving up catches on 69.5% of the passes thrown his way. That's an atrocious number, yet he is our best corner. This number is due to the way we used our corners, and it highlights what I said earlier: no one on our defense had a good year, and in most cases, it wasn't their fault.

He looked bad early on, but after around Week 7, he looked great. Pretty much shut down Steve Smith, Roddy White, and Nate Washington. Two of them are elite receivers, and the other is solid. I think the stats don't represent how he really was last year.

[TKnight24]

I'll say two things: 1) I think Rucker will fit the new scheme nicely, because he's a nice physical corner.

2) We will in fact see cushions on the outside. Not the way we used to, but cushions have a place in every defensive scheme.

Well of course, not every play is Press Coverage. But we will be seeing maybe 5 yd Cushions instead of the 8+ yd Cushions we use to give. And Rucker will fit well. Michigan St. made him Physical. He's defintely in Competition for the #2 CB Position. Maybe even #1 if Powers goes down or doesn't Perform to Expectations

[Gavin]

We will see what happens this year, Im sure things will be somewhat better at least

[HtownColt]

Cool last I had heard fili had been moved at there

Yea when voluntary workouts started they had Nevis starting end,Antonio Johnson starting NT(hope that changes) Redding the other end and Moala backing up Redding

[Superman]

He looked bad early on, but after around Week 7, he looked great. Pretty much shut down Steve Smith, Roddy White, and Nate Washington. Two of them are elite receivers, and the other is solid. I think the stats don't represent how he really was last year.

How did any of those three get shut down against us?

Nate Washington, in two games, had 11 catches for 96 yards and two touchdowns. Roddy White had 4 catches for 76 yards. Steve Smith had 3 catches for 68 yards, and the Panthers ran the ball 35 times. None of that = shut down.

I'm not pinning that all on Powers, because as I said, the scheme hurt our corners. But he didn't shut any of those fellows down.

But it's curious that you say the stats don't represent how good he was, yet you keep bringing up that spurious and irrelevant tackle stat against Kevin Thomas. The stat is what it is. The question becomes "why did Powers give up 70% completions against?" And the answer leads you back to the scheme. You don't just throw the stat out because you don't like it.

[ztboiler]

But it's curious that you say the stats don't represent how good he was, yet you keep bringing up that spurious and irrelevant tackle stat against Kevin Thomas. The stat is what it is. The question becomes "why did Powers give up 70% completions against?" And the answer leads you back to the scheme. You don't just throw the stat out because you don't like it.

Nobody can argue that our scheme wasn't designed to give up a high completion percentage between the 20's. I've watched a lot of Colts games with other fans that were just frustrated by the "bad defense", but if you step away from the frustration for a moment it is really easy to see that we gave up short completions by design. The record shows it was a beautiful formula for winning (touchdown offense, field goal defense). The record also shows that is was a poor formula for winning at the highest level and lowered the competitive ceiling for one of the greatest QB's of all time by keeping him off the field as well as failing to make game changing impact defensive plays throughout the game. I'd argue that our system lowered the competive ceiling for Mathis and Freeney despite making them the focal point. The pressure they brought was so frequently less meaningful without a pass defender in the general vicinity.

[HarassedOffTheSite]

#1 they did sign a DB from the Ravens.

Forgive me. You're correct. We did sign a "Safety". But the discussion is about CBs (which you fall back to later in your post so apparently you understood and were just trying to be cute?). Nevertheless, forgive the confusion.

#2 they had little $$ to spend so they signed three guys to start on the O-Line ( a small need) Cory Redding and that NT.

Not sure what your point is unless you are agreeing that the Colts front office thought we had much bigger needs than CB this offseason.

FA Cornerbacks cost so much you build there through the draft 1st.

That's just a ridiculous statement that is not supported by facts.

Grigson was Quoted as saying they just missed out on a cornerback early in the draft. This would have been HIS BPA on his draft board.

Again, not sure what your point is. A CB was the best player available at that point..............so?

You ask what happened. He DID NOT FALL to the Colts! How simple.

Again, not really sure what your point is.

Cornerbacks, Pass rushers, Left Tackles provide the best value in the draft, AGREE?

Of course not.

We have NO REASON to believe they will draft a left tackle Early in 2013, correct?

Incorrect.

So there is REASON to believe they will draft a CB with one of the first two picks in 2013, IMO.

Because it has been difficult to follow your thought process/coupled with your errors, I'm not really sure what kind of response you're wanting here.

Based on Value and the need for depth, IMO Grigson will be targeting "in his hopes and dreams" at least one BPA CB/S in the 1st 3 rds, for the next few years.

Glad you have an opinion.

"Confused Emoticon"

[Superman]

Nobody can argue that our scheme wasn't designed to give up a high completion percentage between the 20's. I've watched a lot of Colts games with other fans that were just frustrated by the "bad defense", but if you step away from the frustration for a moment it is really easy to see that we gave up short completions by design. The record shows it was a beautiful formula for winning (touchdown offense, field goal defense). The record also shows that is was a poor formula for winning at the highest level and lowered the competitive ceiling for one of the greatest QB's of all time by keeping him off the field as well as failing to make game changing impact defensive plays throughout the game. I'd argue that our system lowered the competive ceiling for Mathis and Freeney despite making them the focal point. The pressure they brought was so frequently less meaningful without a pass defender in the general vicinity.

Great post.

There's more than one way to run a zone shell defense, especially when you have great pass rushers. We too often stuck rigidly to one defensive look, down after down, particularly in crucial situations (like the 4th quarter against Tampa, or the second half against the Saints in the Super Bowl). NFL coaches and quarterbacks know how to beat zone coverage, particularly when you give receivers a free release. We'd telegraph our already predictable defense before the snap, and then everyone is surprised when we give up 71% completions against (which, while I agree that we always gave up a high percentage, it was never that high in previous years).

Another thing is that, in years past, we would situationally use our corners closer to the receivers, give them a little redirect contact at the snap, and then fall into a zone. This would affect the timing of the route and make the quarterback hold the ball a little bit longer, which is a potential death certificate against our pass rush. We stopped in the second half against the Saints in the Super Bowl, and Drew Brees took advantage of us. Conversely, in 2009, we started the game playing off the receivers, and wound up far behind, then adjusted in the second half and played various coverages with various looks before the snap. Those adjustments helped us stop the Patriots and win the game.

I'm not smarter than anyone else, nor do I know more about defense than the coaches we had, but it seemed pretty obvious that the results weren't satisfactory last season. So it puzzles me that we wouldn't make simple changes from game to game, or from quarter to quarter, to get better results. The "we do what we do" mentality got run into the ground over the past couple of seasons, and it's ironic that it happened with a coordinator who was never a conservative zone coverage type of guy.

[Coffeedrinker]

Nobody can argue that our scheme wasn't designed to give up a high completion percentage between the 20's. I've watched a lot of Colts games with other fans that were just frustrated by the "bad defense", but if you step away from the frustration for a moment it is really easy to see that we gave up short completions by design. The record shows it was a beautiful formula for winning (touchdown offense, field goal defense). The record also shows that is was a poor formula for winning at the highest level and lowered the competitive ceiling for one of the greatest QB's of all time by keeping him off the field as well as failing to make game changing impact defensive plays throughout the game. I'd argue that our system lowered the competive ceiling for Mathis and Freeney despite making them the focal point. The pressure they brought was so frequently less meaningful without a pass defender in the general vicinity.

The bolded part is a perfect point. Coyer never adjusted to the step drop and the shotgun, snap and throw that teams used to minimize the impact of Freeney/Mathis. That is something Meeks did, if teams started doing the little slants he would move the DBs closer to the LOS so they could get a jump on that route, Coyer never understood that. He thought that by looping Freeney or Mathis to the inside he could offset that, but it would take 1.5 to 1.7 seconds for them to loop and the QB was getting rid of the ball in 1.3 seconds.