Texans Defense Looks Very Good; Looks Very Aggressive

[Andy]

They looked really good. They blitzed and killed the Jets O-line. Thoughts on the new and improved Texans D?

[Blue Horseshoe]

They looked really good. They blitzed and killed the Jets O-line. Thoughts on the new and improved Texans D?

Wade Phillips is an excellent defensive coordinator there is no question about that.

I figured that he would get them whipped into shape pretty quick.

[jskinnz]

They looked really good. They blitzed and killed the Jets O-line. Thoughts on the new and improved Texans D?

Couldn't that be a bigger indicator of how bad the Jets O line is? Vlad Ducasse was awful last year and does not luck much better this year. Mangold did not make the trip and the 2nd string center got hurt.

It is the first preseason game. Saying the Texans D is improved now based of this performance is premature.

And an aggressive D does not necessarily mean bad things to Manning. In fact I would bet he loves to face a blitzing defense that on occasion can be un-sound. Last time he had all his weapons against the Jet D, the Manning led offense scored 30 and had over 400 yards of offense.

[ruksak]

They looked really good. They blitzed and killed the Jets O-line. Thoughts on the new and improved Texans D?

Could see it coming a mile away. This thing is tailor designed as an anti-Peyton package. On our last forum I called the Texans as the only viable threat to the Colts within our division as was called a fool by many. Wish I could link to my old postings regarding this issue.

I believe that Wade is being very reserved with what he's showing regarding Mario. I gave the issue some thought and I believe he's got him in a holding pattern and will start to expand Mario's pliability as a OLB come regular season.

[jskinnz]

Could see it coming a mile away. This thing is tailor designed as an anti-Peyton package. On our last forum I called the Texans as the only viable threat to the Colts within our division as was called a fool by many. Wish I could link to my old postings regarding this issue.

I believe that Wade is being very reserved with what he's showing regarding Mario. I gave the issue some thought and I believe he's got him in a holding pattern and will start to expand Mario's pliability as a OLB come regular season.

Well the board is not full of the football equivilent of rocket scientists. I would question the football IQ of anyone who can't see the threat Houston poses this year.

Of course he is being reserved with what he is showing not just of Williams but the whole defense in general. I am happy the Colts get them in week # 1. No matter how good Phillips is, you can't make the switch in a single off season, especially this off season, to an entirely new scheme without some growing pains. There will be guys out of position against the Colts. But he will eventually make them a better D.

The anti-Peyton package? What exactly is that?

[ruksak]

Couldn't that be a bigger indicator of how bad the Jets O line is? Vlad Ducasse was awful last year and does not luck much better this year. Mangold did not make the trip and the 2nd string center got hurt.

It is the first preseason game. Saying the Texans D is improved now based of this performance is premature.

And an aggressive D does not necessarily mean bad things to Manning. In fact I would bet he loves to face a blitzing defense that on occasion can be un-sound. Last time he had all his weapons against the Jet D, the Manning led offense scored 30 and had over 400 yards of offense.

Definitely too early, however, Peyton's troubles with the 3-4 are well documented. Most importantly, Houston has great personnel in place. For a 3-4 disguising blitz scheme to work against Peyton, you need cerebral defensive minds. I believe the guy they have in Houston for that is Demeco Ryans, pro-bowler and linebacking extraordinarie. Having him back is going to be a high hurdle for Manning, do not overlook this. I blame his absence for them missing the playoffs, no questions asked.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2011-05-18/demeco-ryans-first-major-injury-took-toll-physically-emotionally

“It was very tough. It felt weird,” Ryans said. “I’d know exactly what they were doing, where the defense should be playing on a particular call, and I can’t help them. It was a helpless feeling.”

Ryans had a tendency to do a lot of yelling at the TV. That didn’t always go over well with the other viewers. “I ended up watching a lot of games by myself,” he said.

He's a shot caller, and a darn good one. It sounds cruel, but our only hope of reigning in Mr Ryans is the horrific injury he is attempting to comeback from. A typical prognosis for an injury of his type is an astounding 32% of NFL players that suffer a like injury never play another down.

http://www.battleredblog.com/2010/12/29/1901749/looking-ahead-demeco-ryans-in-2011

[coltsuser21]

.................

[ruksak]

The anti-Peyton package? What exactly is that?

You will find out in week 1.

I was happy as a clam when I watched Mario run the same motion, from the same spot everytime tonight. Then it occurred to me, they aren't going to show their hand because they want to steal that week 1 game.

They didn't switch to a 3-4 and bring in one of the leagues greatest defensive minds by coincidence, Jskinnz. This is the anti-Peyton package.

[hurricane1122]

they stole week 1 last year and look what happened...

[Chugger]

they stole week 1 last year and look what happened...

What happened was they had the worst pass-defense in recent NFL history.

With Jonathan Joseph in the fold and Wade Phillips attacking the QB, they should see a significant turnaround in that department.

[Chugger]

The anti-Peyton package? What exactly is that?

The Chargers had success over the years by using Stephen Cooper to audible and shift the defense at the line based on what he thinks that Peyton is doing. But Cooper is a film junkie and a vet. I'm not sure if the Texans have anyone as smart or experienced who can do that with the kind of success that Cooper has had.

[ruksak]

The Chargers had success over the years by using Stephen Cooper to audible and shift the defense at the line based on what he thinks that Peyton is doing. But Cooper is a film junkie and a vet. I'm not sure if the Texans have anyone as smart or experienced who can do that with the kind of success that Cooper has had.

I already covered this above, regarding the return of DeMeco Ryans.

ruksak wrote:

For a 3-4 disguising blitz scheme to work against Peyton, you need cerebral defensive minds. I believe the guy they have in Houston for that is Demeco Ryans, pro-bowler and linebacking extraordinarie. Having him back is going to be a high hurdle for Manning, do not overlook this. I blame his absence for them missing the playoffs, no questions asked.

Chugger wrote:

they stole week 1 last year and look what happened...

Ryans got placed on IR and missed the last 9 games.

[jskinnz]

Definitely too early, however, Peyton's troubles with the 3-4 are well documented. Most importantly, Houston has great personnel in place. For a 3-4 disguising blitz scheme to work against Peyton, you need cerebral defensive minds. I believe the guy they have in Houston for that is Demeco Ryans, pro-bowler and linebacking extraordinarie. Having him back is going to be a high hurdle for Manning, do not overlook this. I blame his absence for them missing the playoffs, no questions asked.

Manning's 3-4 troubles are fiction. He has had outstanding games against that scheme.

[chrisfarley]

We're in trouble in week one. They are going to be coming at us guns a-blazin' I think they looked about 40% about what they are going to look like in our first game. I talked to a friend in Houston who is close to the team. They are going all out to get ready for the COLTS and the COLTS only and will pull out ALL STOPS according to him. Wade IS indeed trying to devise a scheme to alter Mannings success rate (dont they all try), but appearantly they have better weopons than they've ever had before and the 3-4 is of particular note he said. Something about the way they are going to use Ryans and Mario. UGH, that's all I wanted to hear.

[jskinnz]

We're in trouble in week one. They are going to be coming at us guns a-blazin' I think they looked about 40% about what they are going to look like in our first game. I talked to a friend in Houston who is close to the team. They are going all out to get ready for the COLTS and the COLTS only and will pull out ALL STOPS according to him. Wade IS indeed trying to devise a scheme to alter Mannings success rate (dont they all try), but appearantly they have better weopons than they've ever had before and the 3-4 is of particular note he said. Something about the way they are going to use Ryans and Mario. UGH, that's all I wanted to hear.

That is nice and stuff but...

you don't think the Colts have their focus on Houston too? You don't think the are devising schemes to get Mario isolated in coverage? The Colts have coaches and players on scholarship too. And they have proven to be a fairly good bunch at winning games.

[ruksak]

Manning's 3-4 troubles are fiction. He has had outstanding games against that scheme.

You're missing my point. Many of his greatest failures have been against the 3-4. Peyton has chewed up and spit out all manner of defense at one point or another. But the 3-4 schemes have presented him with his most flawed performances ever. To his credit, he always figures them out to some extent.

I may be wrong, if I am please holler at me for it, but wasn't SD running a 3-4 against Manning during that 6 INT belly-flop several years ago? We all know about the 05 AFCCG against Pitt. Lebeau had him scrambling in panic to figure out his blitz schemes.

Please note I'm not championing the 3-4 as a magic bullet against Manning. I'm only stating that this has been the most consistent scheme in unraveling Manning's game.

[bayone]

That is nice and stuff but...

you don't think the Colts have their focus on Houston too? You don't think the are devising schemes to get Mario isolated in coverage? The Colts have coaches and players on scholarship too. And they have proven to be a fairly good bunch at winning games.

If Isolated manning will beat him if anytime to throw the ball, if has to fast those long arms may sy till be close enough to bat down a ball

[jskinnz]

You're missing my point. Many of his greatest failures have been against the 3-4. Peyton has chewed up and spit out all manner of defense at one point or another. But the 3-4 schemes have presented him with his most flawed performances ever. To his credit, he always figures them out to some extent.

I may be wrong, if I am please holler at me for it, but wasn't SD running a 3-4 against Manning during that 6 INT belly-flop several years ago? We all know about the 05 AFCCG against Pitt. Lebeau had him scrambling in panic to figure out his blitz schemes.

Please note I'm not championing the 3-4 as a magic bullet against Manning. I'm only stating that this has been the most consistent scheme in unraveling Manning's game.

He has had good and bad games against all manner of defenses. The 3-4 thing is a myth. I understand that you are saying that Houston has the personnel to be successful but that is up for debate. They are making an entirely new schematic switch and that can't happen without some bumps in the road.

[BCMak24]

houston is still no threat to me.....as long as they have schaub as qb they wont make it far plus their schedule is way tougher than ours so they wont make it to the playoffs again

[Camio]

You're missing my point. Many of his greatest failures have been against the 3-4. Peyton has chewed up and spit out all manner of defense at one point or another. But the 3-4 schemes have presented him with his most flawed performances ever. To his credit, he always figures them out to some extent.

I may be wrong, if I am please holler at me for it, but wasn't SD running a 3-4 against Manning during that 6 INT belly-flop several years ago? We all know about the 05 AFCCG against Pitt. Lebeau had him scrambling in panic to figure out his blitz schemes.

Please note I'm not championing the 3-4 as a magic bullet against Manning. I'm only stating that this has been the most consistent scheme in unraveling Manning's game.

As jskinnz said, The 3-4 thing is indeed a myth.

Back in 01-04 (mostly), Peyton had troubles vs 1 team and it was the Pats who were using a 3-4. Thing is, every teams in the NFL had troubles vs the Pats and really, it was because of BB.

Since then, if you look at the last 6-7 years or so, Chargers, Steelers and Ravens have had good to great defenses (in the AFC). These teams have been using the 3-4. Now ask yourself, is it really Manning having troubles vs the 3-4 or vs good/great defenses?

If anything, the games Manning has had since about 5 years (if you look at it as a whole) vs the good/great defenses of the AFC (all pretty much using 3-4) shows exactly the 3-4 thing and PM having problems is a myth: Chargers, Pats, Steelers, Jets, Ravens.

The stats Manning has had in those games speak volume. 400yards + passing in some of those games, without 0 running game, that really tells you how much PM's having trouble vs the 3-4.

For the record, that 6 ints game vs the Chargers was in the rain, with a useless OL and no run game.

For that 6 ints game, I could give you the example of that Chargers game in the playoff, which the Colts lost but PM had over 400 yards passing. You're mixing the fact the Colts have had 0 running game and a poor defense with "PM has had troubles vs the 3-4 because the Colts have been ending up losing". The Colts lost to a better team. PM dominated that D in that game but the rest of the Colts team (running game and defense) was so poor it couldnt managed to just play decent and win that game vs the Chargers.

What would be more accurate to say would be "PM has been able to keep the Colts in games where they didnt had a business being in".

The fact he's the only player in the NFL to be able to do so shouldnt be held against him, and certainly not used to make an argument against him.

[ruksak]

As jskinnz said, The 3-4 thing is indeed a myth.

Back in 01-04 (mostly), Peyton had troubles vs 1 team and it was the Pats who were using a 3-4. Thing is, every teams in the NFL had troubles vs the Pats and really, it was because of BB.

Since then, if you look at the last 6-7 years or so, Chargers, Steelers and Ravens have had good to great defenses (in the AFC). These teams have been using the 3-4. Now ask yourself, is it really Manning having troubles vs the 3-4 or vs good/great defenses?

If anything, the games Manning has had since about 5 years (if you look at it as a whole) vs the good/great defenses of the AFC (all pretty much using 3-4) shows exactly the 3-4 thing and PM having problems is a myth: Chargers, Pats, Steelers, Jets, Ravens.

The stats Manning has had in those games speak volume. 400yards + passing in some of those games, without 0 running game, that really tells you how much PM's having trouble vs the 3-4.

For the record, that 6 ints game vs the Chargers was in the rain, with a useless OL and no run game.

For that 6 ints game, I could give you the example of that Chargers game in the playoff, which the Colts lost but PM had over 400 yards passing. You're mixing the fact the Colts have had 0 running game and a poor defense with "PM has had troubles vs the 3-4 because the Colts have been ending up losing". The Colts lost to a better team. PM dominated that D in that game but the rest of the Colts team (running game and defense) was so poor it couldnt managed to just play decent and win that game vs the Chargers.

What would be more accurate to say would be "PM has been able to keep the Colts in games where they didnt had a business being in".

The fact he's the only player in the NFL to be able to do so shouldnt be held against him, and certainly not used to make an argument against him.

Do you not see how inherently backward it is of you to say what you are saying?

Essentially you are stating "The 3-4 isn't what gives Manning trouble, its the fact that these defenses were better defenses".

These "better defenses" are 3-4 defenses. So WTH?

You are tauting yardage totals while seemingly purposely ignoring the increase in turnover. The increase in turnover is directly tied to the scheme and the prototype player for the scheme.

Don't ignore the elephant in the room.

Peyton does better against 4-3, why? They are easier to read pre-snap, along with the cover-2 schemes often attached to the 4-3 line-up.

In reference to the big yardage numbers you posted;

It is common knowledge and not unusual at all for QB's that are losing by multiple scores to end up with 300-400 YDS. Because they abandon the run game and moderate range passing in lew of stretching the field. Hence why Matt Schaub pounded out 4k+ YDS in each of the last two seasons. A talented QB, an upper echelon WR and a porous defense resulted in constant downfield passing.

[Camio]

Do you not see how inherently backward it is of you to say what you are saying?

Essentially you are stating "The 3-4 isn't what gives Manning trouble, its the fact that these defenses were better defenses".

These "better defenses" are 3-4 defenses. So WTH?

I'll help you out: you can be a good defense and be a 3-4 or 4-3, thats irrelevant. Buccs and Bears had top notch defenses and got to the SB with a 4-3. You're too stuck up to the 3-4 for some reason, I'm not sure why. Its not "better" or anything, its just that 4-3 and 3-4 are different. You do know the Pats, Steelers, Ravens, Chargers, Jets and other teams that used the 3-4 have missed the playoffs a few times just like they did the playoffs in some other years.

You are tauting yardage totals while seemingly purposely ignoring the increase in turnover. The increase in turnover is directly tied to the scheme and the prototype player for the scheme.

Don't ignore the elephant in the room.

Actually, the elephant says over 300 and 400 yards in back-to-back postseason games vs the Chargers in 07 and 08 and both times, PM had great games passing the ball with incompetent running game. Wanna talk about the Ravens not being able to beat the Colts since years? How about PM's success vs the Jets? How about all those nice games vs the Pats?

Peyton does better against 4-3, why? They are easier to read pre-snap, along with the cover-2 schemes often attached to the 4-3 line-up.

You're the one saying that. I could post stats here where PM has had over 400 yards passing vs 3-4, just like he's had bad games vs the 4-3. There has however been a trend, in the last few years, of a few teams moving to the 3-4 because it was the "hot thing", due to Pats and Steelers success. Therefore, there has been more 3-4 defenses and some of the good/great defenses in the NFL in the last decade have been 3-4 defenses.

A great defense, regardless of 3-4 or 4-3, will be a great defense. Offenses are, vs those great defenses, expected to have some troubles. Coming out here and trying to make a point because PM has had some bad games vs some great defenses, I dont see your point.

In reference to the big yardage numbers you posted;

It is common knowledge and not unusual at all for QB's that are losing by multiple scores to end up with 300-400 YDS. Because they abandon the run game and moderate range passing in lew of stretching the field. Hence why Matt Schaub pounded out 4k+ YDS in each of the last two seasons. A talented QB, an upper echelon WR and a porous defense resulted in constant downfield passing.

Actually, the Colts were leading both games late in the 4th (with 5 mins left or so in the 4th, and with 1 min left in the 4th, and it got into OT).

Bottom line: Chargers couldnt stop, in both games, Colts passing attack, despite the Colts having incompetent running game in both games and despite both games being close ones, where Colts had the lead in both games.

You shouldnt be saying stuff without verifying first

[ruksak]

I'll help you out: you can be a good defense and be a 3-4 or 4-3, thats irrelevant. Buccs and Bears had top notch defenses and got to the SB with a 4-3. You're too stuck up to the 3-4 for some reason, I'm not sure why. Its not "better" or anything, its just that 4-3 and 3-4 are different. You do know the Pats, Steelers, Ravens, Chargers, Jets and other teams that used the 3-4 have missed the playoffs a few times just like they did the playoffs in some other years.

Actually, I don't care for the 3-4. It is too highly reliant on talented players to make it feasible. Without an extraordinarily cerebral captain, it fails. I care not for it due to its reliance on highly specialized player. Why are you extrapolating that I am some flag waiving 3-4 fanboy? Where did you get this idea?

Actually, the elephant says over 300 and 400 yards in back-to-back postseason games vs the Chargers in 07 and 08 and both times, PM had great games passing the ball with incompetent running game.

You shouldnt be saying stuff without verifying first

Here is where I'm going to destroy you, and I'll do so with emphasis.

I mentioned in an earlier post, apparently you glazed over it, that QB's regularly post 300-400 YD games when they are losing. So don't quote me yardage totals as if they infer that he's picking the 3-4 apart in losing efforts. The end result quantifies the performance.

The last time Manning saw SD and their 3-4, Manning tossed the game away with 4 INTS, thats roughly 1/4 of the INTs he threw all season. The 3-4 accomplished this while holding the Colts to a mere 24 YDS rushing. For his career against this one manifestation of the 3-4 (SD), Manning stands at 17 TDS and 22 INTS and a 4-5 W/L record.

If you dig through his career, and this is what I'm preaching concerning Manning and the 3-4, he throws gobs and gobs of INTs against 3-4 schemes with regularity. Forget the YDS, they matter not. YDS don't win games, INTS, however, lose games with demonic speed.

It is this FACT that caused our only viable division rival (Houston) in 2011 to switch to the 3-4, as well as the most notable 3-4 coach available, Wade Phillips.

I dont see your point

You have to stop trying so hard to be right and listen, or rather read and comprehend the message I send. That is, Manning turns the ball over to the 3-4 at a far far disproportionate rate than he does against other schemes. You can quote me yardage totals until your fingers become gangrenous, it matters not. Wins and losses are all that matters, yards don't win games, turnovers lose games. Do like Blues Clues and put the pieces together.

Side note: Please understand that I say all this in the spirit of friendly debate. I mean not to be disrespectful. We all have a wide array of opinions, and I am simply stating mine.

[Camio]

Actually, I don't care for the 3-4. It is too highly reliant on talented players to make it feasible. Without an extraordinarily cerebral captain, it fails. I care not for it due to its reliance on highly specialized player. Why are you extrapolating that I am some flag waiving 3-4 fanboy? Where did you get this idea?

Here is where I'm going to destroy you, and I'll do so with emphasis.

I mentioned in an earlier post, apparently you glazed over it, that QB's regularly post 300-400 YD games when they are losing. So don't quote me yardage totals as if they infer that he's picking the 3-4 apart in losing efforts. The end result quantifies the performance.

The last time Manning saw SD and their 3-4, Manning tossed the game away with 4 INTS, thats roughly 1/4 of the INTs he threw all season. The 3-4 accomplished this while holding the Colts to a mere 24 YDS rushing. For his career against this one manifestation of the 3-4 (SD), Manning stands at 17 TDS and 22 INTS and a 4-5 W/L record.

If you dig through his career, and this is what I'm preaching concerning Manning and the 3-4, he throws gobs and gobs of INTs against 3-4 schemes with regularity. Forget the YDS, they matter not. YDS don't win games, INTS, however, lose games with demonic speed.

It is this FACT that caused our only viable division rival (Houston) in 2011 to switch to the 3-4, as well as the most notable 3-4 coach available, Wade Phillips.

You have to stop trying so hard to be right and listen, or rather read and comprehend the message I send. That is, Manning turns the ball over to the 3-4 at a far far disproportionate rate than he does against other schemes. You can quote me yardage totals until your fingers become gangrenous, it matters not. Wins and losses are all that matters, yards don't win games, turnovers lose games. Do like Blues Clues and put the pieces together.

Side note: Please understand that I say all this in the spirit of friendly debate. I mean not to be disrespectful. We all have a wide array of opinions, and I am simply stating mine.

I bolded the interesting part. Thing is, I'm apparently not the only one who didnt agreed with you, but I guess you missed that part eh?

As far as stats, I recall last year. You mean the stretch where PM was off for a few games, with 2nd stringers in? Oh, that strech? Lets base PM's career over that short period!

I mentioned in an earlier post, apparently you glazed over it, that QB's regularly post 300-400 YD games when they are losing. So don't quote me yardage totals as if they infer that he's picking the 3-4 apart in losing efforts. The end result quantifies the performance.

Actually, you did so a few posts above after I said PM has had 300+ and 400+ games vs the Chargers. Your awnser was "because they were trailing" or something, which I kinda killed when I said "Colts were leading late in the 4th, both games".

Nicely tried tho...

[ruksak]

I bolded the interesting part. Thing is, I'm apparently not the only one who didnt agreed with you, but I guess you missed that part eh?

That odd point doesn't support your argument. Why even say such an odd comment?

As far as stats, I recall last year. You mean the stretch where PM was off for a few games, with 2nd stringers in? Oh, that stretch? Lets base PM's career over that short period!

Facepalm? Yes...I facepalm now... <<<facepalm!! I'm trying so hard to site example after example going back several years yet you keep compartmentalizing things with such odd scope. I'm not talkin bout a few games. I have clearly reflected upon his career, most notably, the last 6-8 years as to keep it relevant.

Actually, you did so a few posts above after I said PM has had 300+ and 400+ games vs the Chargers. Your answer was "because they were trailing" or something, which I kinda killed when I said "Colts were leading late in the 4th, both games".

Look man, you're going to have to give specific examples if you want specific responses. Yes, Peyton had 300-400 YDS games versus the chargers, and had it close toward the end of the game. I'll get specific since you lack the wherewithal to do so. The infamous November 11 2007 , 6 INT game.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271111024

From Article:

After nearly blowing all of a 23-7 fourth-quarter lead, the Chargers could exhale.

Manning completed 34 of a career-high 56 attempts for 328 yards.

There you are. A magnificent 328 YD 6 INT losing effort. Point made yet? Can I remove my palm from my face, it is getting mighty sweaty? Stop talking about yards. The last time Peyton beat SD he only posted 255 YDS.

Nicely tried tho...

I'm nice like that. Thank you.

[Camio]

That odd point doesn't support your argument. Why even say such an odd comment?

That was in response to one of your comment:

You have to stop trying so hard to be right and listen, or rather read and comprehend the message I send.

I was simply stating that apparently, I'm not the only one who hasnt been agreeing with the "PM has troubles with 3-4" thingy you've been rolling with all over this thread. The difference is, instead of not bothering replying to the thread when I saw you making your claim, and after seeing 1 person replying he didnt agree, and after seeing your lack of argument, I decided to jump in. This shouldnt be held against me. Make your argument or move along

As for the rest, nothing new you're bringing up that hasnt already been discussed.

We all know about PM bad strech last year as well as the 6 INTs game in the rain, but it was mostly due to the 3-4 than the rain!

After all, it was raining in the SB the Colts won vs the Bears but PM didnt threw 6 picks, making it obvious that 3-4>rain. You see, I can revert to funny and flawed arguments too

I like tho how you brought up a game where PM had to throw 55 times or something. If anything, that supports something I brought up earlier: "PM's asked to do more for his team than any other player in the NFL, by a big margin."

The greatness that is PM, which comes with good and sometimes bad, due mostly to bad decision making in the management (like lack of a competent running game for a few years now), shouldnt be held against him.

Of course, on some rare occasions, even PM himself cant overcome odds. Yes, even PM cant! That has nothing to do with 3-4 tho. Its just that some teams happen to be better than the Colts, happen to have great Ds (3-4 or 4-3) or are better managed than the Colts (because yes, this is also the reality).

Basically, there's been great 3-4 and 4-3 Ds, both of which have given PM and other good qbs problems. Not because its 4-3 or 3-4, but because that what great Ds do. Its the purpose.

[ruksak]

Here is a comprehensive look at what has caused this "myth" to perpetuate;

This information was compiled in 09. It is Peyton Manning's career statistics against the 3-4 and 4-3 respectively. I have added the pertinent numbers from last seasons NYJ playoff;

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/1178/manning-s-playoff-record-vs-3-4-defenses-not-good

The Colts are 7-8 in the playoffs with Manning under center. But Manning and Indianapolis are 6-3 against teams which use a 4-3 scheme as their base defense and just 1-5 against teams which primarily run the 3-4.

Manning has actually thrown for more yards against 3-4 defenses, but his touchdown-to-interception ratio and sacks are much worse.

^^Exactly as I have been stating and, for whatever reason, being told I am wrong. Often more passing yards, yet more INTS to TDS. Last years playoff game vs the NYJ saw him tally a very modest stat column, however zero INTS. So this was a bit of a change from his overall career against 3-4 defense in post-season.

Career Stats against 3-4 in Playoffs;

W-L:

6-3 against 4-3

1-5 against 3-4

TD-INT:

15-9 @ (4-3)

7-8 @ (3-4)

Sacked:

6 @ (4-3)

13 @ (3-4)

I really cannot argue any further. I have presented a strong case as to why the "myth" that Peyton has troubles against the 3-4 is actually based on statistical fact. The numbers indicate he throws less TDS while throwing more INTS. These numbers aren't dramatic and eye popping, however they show a disparity that cannot be ignored, nor titled as a myth.

[bluebombers87]

Here is a comprehensive look at what has caused this "myth" to perpetuate;

This information was compiled in 09. It is Peyton Manning's career statistics against the 3-4 and 4-3 respectively. I have added the pertinent numbers from last seasons NYJ playoff;

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/1178/manning-s-playoff-record-vs-3-4-defenses-not-good

^^Exactly as I have been stating and, for whatever reason, being told I am wrong. Often more passing yards, yet more INTS to TDS. Last years playoff game vs the NYJ saw him tally a very modest stat column, however zero INTS. So this was a bit of a change from his overall career against 3-4 defense in post-season.

Career Stats against 3-4 in Playoffs;

W-L:

6-3 against 4-3

1-5 against 3-4

TD-INT:

15-9 @ (4-3)

7-8 @ (3-4)

Sacked:

6 @ (4-3)

13 @ (3-4)

I really cannot argue any further. I have presented a strong case as to why the "myth" that Peyton has troubles against the 3-4 is actually based on statistical fact. The numbers indicate he throws less TDS while throwing more INTS. These numbers aren't dramatic and eye popping, however they show a disparity that cannot be ignored, nor titled as a myth.

The thing is, that facts can absolutely be misrepresented. You've presented a selection of games of the Colts against teams in the playoffs. That right there limits the pool of selection. Now within that list, you state these facts as proof when they more or less represent a narrowed view. Of about the dozen teams using the 3-4 defenses, Manning early on in his career had problems w/ New England (3-4), Pittsburgh (3-4) and San Diego (3-4). The problem is that more recently in his career Manning has had little to no problem scoring points against these teams.

Since the link you posted doesn't offer a breakdown, I'm going to go w/ the above explaination that while overall his numbers aren't great, Manning has recently had very little trouble w/ the 3-4 (not to mention he's easily handled all the other teams w/ the 3-4 in the league including the Baltimore Ravens who have been considered one of the better defenses in league history).

As another poster stated before, it has more to do w/ better teams employing the 3-4 than the theory of the 3-4 being the bane of Manning's existance.

As for the original topic of the thread; lot of people are worried about Houston. What makes you think Manning hasn't been preparing for this? He has a tv and probably a computer. Do you honestly think he hasn't heard or seen what Houston has been doing? Odds are he's got better access than the media to what other teams are doing. While he's been sitting around when other teams are "getting better", Manning undboubtedly has been watching, studying, studying and studying. Going over gameplan after gameplan after gameplan. It is the single greatest mistake any one person can make about Manning when people assume teams now days can throw something at him he hasn't seen before or hasn't prepared for.

[ruksak]

The thing is, that facts can absolutely be misrepresented. You've presented a selection of games of the Colts against teams in the playoffs. That right there limits the pool of selection.

There is no better platform in which to measure QB's performance than the playoffs. Given the fact that Manning has had a high number of playoff games I thought this was a prudent measuring stick to utilize. Add to that the playoffs bring an all-out environment, as you know, the players leave nothing on the field. Narrowing the scope to omit regular season games wasn't a tricky maneuver on my part. I did this not to bolster my point through omission, rather, I did so to eliminate the x-factors involved in regular season games. i.e. late season games with players sitting and other dynamics which could taint the overall perception of the stats.

....you state these facts as proof....

Yes, I stated these facts as proof. I suppose I could have stated falsehoods as proof, or conversely, stated facts as non-truths, but that would have been disingenuous, wouldn't it?

Also....L0L what?

[Camio]

Those are nice stats but they arent accurate: Colts have beaten the Pats and Jets in the playoffs. This means PM cant be 1-5 vs the 3-4 in the playoffs.

Besides, the person who did that article is clueless. He has no idea what he was talking about and simply used the W and L to make an argument without even watching the games.

Anyone with a head above their shoulders could see PM isnt the reason why the Colts lost to the Chargers twice in the playoffs. How can someone then use the "Colts lost vs a 3-4 D" to make it "...therefore PM cant beat 3-4".

Thats silly and totally foolish.

I'm sorry but if this is the only thing you can bring up to back up your argument, then we might as well stop here. If anything, this proves that:

-many journalists/writters/bloggers who do NFL articles and stuff are clueless but that, we knew that already

-that despite PM being the best NFL player in the last 30 years (with Rice), even he cant overcome the deficiencies and weaknesses of his team and beat a stronger SD team, despite having 2 great games.

As I said before, the fact there has been bad decision making in the management level (this means BP btw) shouldnt be held against PM and certainly shouldnt be used to make an argument, whatever it may be, against PM, just for the sake of trying to prove a point.

If anything, it proves PM is amazing, but not God. That, we knew already

Edit: how in the blue heck is it PM's fault the Colts lost to the Jets last year? Does that mean PM has troubles vs the 3-4? No. It means we got an average, at best, head coach.

That was a nice usage of a timeout right there: "hey, lets help out the other team so we lose to a 3-4 team and then, we can say PM cant beat 3-4"

This, along with poor kickoff coverage (poor special teams for the Colts since years really, besides the kickers.

It goes back to bad management and has nothing to do with PM tho.

Edit²: this thread can now be closed

[bluebombers87]

There is no better platform in which to measure QB's performance than the playoffs. Given the fact that Manning has had a high number of playoff games I thought this was a prudent measuring stick to utilize. Add to that the playoffs bring an all-out environment, as you know, the players leave nothing on the field. Narrowing the scope to omit regular season games wasn't a tricky maneuver on my part. I did this not to bolster my point through omission, rather, I did so to eliminate the x-factors involved in regular season games. i.e. late season games with players sitting and other dynamics which could taint the overall perception of the stats.

Yes, I stated these facts as proof. I suppose I could have stated falsehoods as proof, or conversely, stated facts as non-truths, but that would have been disingenuous, wouldn't it?

Also....L0L what?

Your argument is that Mannign has problems w/ 3-4 defenses. I offered an argument to the contrary (for reasons you failed to reply to). Manning has beaten the Jets. Manning has beaten the Ravens. Manning has beaten the Patriots. The Chargers are the only team w/ a 3-4 defense that he hasn't beaten, but he's put up very impressive numbers, hence he doesn't have difficulty scoring on 3-4 defenses. It's a comparison of Manning early in his career versus later in his career.

And way to cherry pick one phrase (not even a complete thought) from one sentence of my post. My entire point was that you can't represent these limited statistics and state that Manning overall has issues w/ a certain defensive scheme when there is evidence to the contrary. Manning can't figure out one 3-4 defense in the regular season and then be completely baffled by another 3-4 defense in the playoffs (and then have you chalk it up to the defensive theory and not the players/coaching/individual defensive coordinator).

But hey, keep on cherry picking.

[ruksak]

Those are nice stats but they arent accurate: Colts have beaten the Pats and Jets in the playoffs. This means PM cant be 1-5 vs the 3-4 in the playoffs.

The patriots ran a modified version of the 3-4 in that game, known as the "Fairbanks-Bullough" 3-4 system. MR Kahursky was apparently only stating Manning's record against a BASE 3-4, and you are correct in pointing that out. Good eye, bud.

However, that only changes the W-L record to 2-5, still not lookin good.

[ruksak]

Your argument is that Mannign has problems w/ 3-4 defenses. I offered an argument to the contrary (for reasons you failed to reply to). Manning has beaten the Jets. Manning has beaten the Ravens. Manning has beaten the Patriots. The Chargers are the only team w/ a 3-4 defense that he hasn't beaten, but he's put up very impressive numbers, hence he doesn't have difficulty scoring on 3-4 defenses. It's a comparison of Manning early in his career versus later in his career.

And way to cherry pick one phrase (not even a complete thought) from one sentence of my post. My entire point was that you can't represent these limited statistics and state that Manning overall has issues w/ a certain defensive scheme when there is evidence to the contrary. Manning can't figure out one 3-4 defense in the regular season and then be completely baffled by another 3-4 defense in the playoffs (and then have you chalk it up to the defensive theory and not the players/coaching/individual defensive coordinator).

But hey, keep on cherry picking.

Sorry guy. I just thought that was a hilarious arrangement of words : "you state these facts as proof". C'mon guy, it was funny.

I am getting pulled away from my only true point regarding the 3-4 vs Manning by some serious nonsense and redundant misfires.

I am not saying Manning can't move the ball effectively against the 3-4. I am not saying that Manning cannot score TD's effectively vs a 3-4. I am pointing out his history of inopportune INTS that cause loses disproportionately coming against 3-4 schemes. I am only truly meaning to refer to turnovers. I have been saying this since the first page.

[Camio]

The patriots ran a modified version of the 3-4 in that game, known as the "Fairbanks-Bullough" 3-4 system. MR Kahursky was apparently only stating Manning's record against a BASE 3-4, and you are correct in pointing that out. Good eye, bud.

However, that only changes the W-L record to 2-5, still not lookin good.

Only 2-5, because he's stuck with a GM that hasnt fixed the running game and defense in years (say 07-10). How is it PM's fault for losing to the Chargers in those 2 games? 300+ and 400+ yards, having the lead in both games with 5 mins and 1 min left in the 4th.

How can you even dare say its due to PM?

Really, you have nothing to prove your point. You're using the w-l of a team (Colts) to prove how 1 single player is (PM) vs something (3-4).

Its my turn then: Dilfer was a better QB than Marino ever was. Reason being, Dilfer won a SB and Marino didnt, therefore Dilfer>Marino.

Lets play some more! Aikman was a better QB than PM because 3 ringggggggzzzz>1.

Now, will you stop basing yourself off teams records and focus about the individual and how he actually performed in those games?

[Camio]

Sorry guy. I just thought that was a hilarious arrangement of words : "you state these facts as proof". C'mon guy, it was funny.

I am getting pulled away from my only true point regarding the 3-4 vs Manning by some serious nonsense and redundant misfires.

I am not saying Manning can't move the ball effectively against the 3-4. I am not saying that Manning cannot score TD's effectively vs a 3-4. I am pointing out his history of inopportune INTS that cause loses disproportionately coming against 3-4 schemes. I am only truly meaning to refer to turnovers. I have been saying this since the first page.

How in the blue heck can you say PM is 1-5 vs 3-4 in the playoffs, therefore, he cant beat 3-4 and then, come up with something that totally contradicts the 1-5 stats you yourself brought up and used to attempt to make your argument?

PM threw for over 300 and 400 yards in 2 of those losses, vs the Chargers that is, with a crappy running game on top of that. I dont see how inopportune INTS as you put it is the reason why the Colts lost.

Seriously, get real.

[ruksak]

Its my turn then: Dilfer was a better QB than Marino ever was. Reason being, Dilfer won a SB and Marino didnt, therefore Dilfer>Marino.

Lets play some more! Aikman was a better QB than PM because 3 ringggggggzzzz>1.

Now, will you stop basing yourself off teams records and focus about the individual and how he actually performed in those games?

Dude....don't. Don't go off into a tangential rant that has nothing to do with anything I have said. I am most certainly not of that school of thought....the "rings measure a QB's total worth" thing....not me. I'm debating with facts and history pertinent to the subject at hand and you're being purposely obtuse.

Really, you have nothing to prove your point. You're using the w-l of a team (Colts) to prove how 1 single player is (PM) vs something (3-4).

Here is where I'm going to give you your propers for being a good debater. I am fair if nothing else. You make a great point, in that Manning gets too much blame and that maybe it is our total scheme, as a team, that has follies against these 3-4 teams. QB's get too much credit and too much blame.

[ruksak]

How in the blue heck can you say PM is 1-5 vs 3-4 in the playoffs, therefore, he cant beat 3-4 and then, come up with something that totally contradicts the 1-5 stats you yourself brought up and used to attempt to make your argument?

PM threw for over 300 and 400 yards in 2 of those losses, vs the Chargers that is, with a crappy running game on top of that. I dont see how inopportune INTS as you put it is the reason why the Colts lost.

Seriously, get real.

Because you can throw for 600 YDS and still lose if you commit a turnover at key moments. This is why we have 1 ring, not two. If Manning throws incomplete against NO in 09, we may still win. But....sadly, he threw a heinous pick 6 and it broke our back. (I understand that wasn't a 3-4)

There was a very minor error in the citation I provided, with a due and reasonable explanation. You're waiving that flag a tad high. It doesn't unravel the point I'm making here.

[bluebombers87]

Sorry guy. I just thought that was a hilarious arrangement of words : "you state these facts as proof". C'mon guy, it was funny.

I am getting pulled away from my only true point regarding the 3-4 vs Manning by some serious nonsense and redundant misfires.

I am not saying Manning can't move the ball effectively against the 3-4. I am not saying that Manning cannot score TD's effectively vs a 3-4. I am pointing out his history of inopportune INTS that cause loses disproportionately coming against 3-4 schemes. I am only truly meaning to refer to turnovers. I have been saying this since the first page.

First off, I'm not your guy, fella.

The arrangement of the words you state these facts as proof of "blank" is perfectly valid for beginning an argument. You state x (facts about anything) and offer them up as proof for y (any situation). You could state all apples are red because macintosh apples are red. But that's not true. I get what you mean. Facts are often used as proof but you took my statement and pulled a portion out of it and criticized it for humor purposes. Needless to say I wasn't laughing.

The history you provided is invalid though. You state you use these statistics as proof when they represent the playoffs. Even that is flawed. Manning has had troubles in the playoffs against certain teams that use the 3-4 while has had success against other teams in the playoffs that use the 3-4. In the regular season the argument becomes even more silly.

[ruksak]

First off, I'm not your guy, fella.

I'm not your fella, buddy.

[b0ng]

A 3-4 is only as good as the players in the scheme. I don't think Peyton has ever had a problem with sub par teams that run the 3-4 (49'ers and Cardinals immediately come to mind). The real question here is whether Mario Williams is going to be the premiere pass rush artist that we hope he can be. The Texans defense is only going to be good as the pressure it can apply to a QB, and I think any team with a running back should be testing the middle rush defense as the NT is not a big guy at all.

heck, the Texans did just fine getting Manning dirty in the first week last year and he still passed for like 400,000 yards. It's just that we could sustain drives with our run game to win that game.