Can Mathis and Freeney Cover?

[Smonroe]

I was listening to Sirius yesterday and a Colts fan called in to ask Pat Kirwan about our new D, and about Frathis playing OLB.

Kirwan said they'll be fine on third down, since they'll probably be rushing the passer. But he said it will be interesting to see how teams test them on 1st and 2nd down.

He thinks teams will spread out, like they do against the Steelers and force them to cover the slot. There was a lot more to the conversation, and he made a lot of good points. Basically, it remains to be seen how they'll handle it. We'll know soon enough in the preseason games.

I'm looking forward to the new D, but I expect a lot of growing pains.

Thoughts?

(BTW, I know this has been discussed before. I just wanted to bring in Kirwan's opinion, I respect him as an analyst)

[21isSuperman]

Like you, I really like Pat Kirwin. In terms of Freeney, here are my thoughts:

-Pagano himself has said he sees Freeney as the Suggs type. I believe Suggs rushed the passer on most of his plays and was rarely called to cover

-Like Ware in Dallas and Suggs in Baltimore, I think Freeney will be rushing the passer on almost every down. I highly doubt they use him to cover.

In terms of Mathis, I point you to this article from June 13:

http://www.colts.com...9f-6443c1a7cb3d

And a quote from Chuck Pagano:

“To see Robert Mathis run with (rookie tight end Coby) Fleener on a wheel route and break up a pass in the end zone, we all got excited when that happened,” said Pagano.

Overall, I'm not very concerned about Mathis and Freeney covering. I'm sure Pagano and Manusky will utilize Freeney and Mathis' strengths.

[Smonroe]

Like you, I really like Pat Kirwin. In terms of Freeney, here are my thoughts:

-Pagano himself has said he sees Freeney as the Suggs type. I believe Suggs rushed the passer on most of his plays and was rarely called to cover

-Like Ware in Dallas and Suggs in Baltimore, I think Freeney will be rushing the passer on almost every down. I highly doubt they use him to cover.

In terms of Mathis, I point you to this article from June 13:

http://www.colts.com...9f-6443c1a7cb3d

And a quote from Chuck Pagano:

Overall, I'm not very concerned about Mathis and Freeney covering. I'm sure Pagano and Manusky will utilize Freeney and Mathis' strengths.

Thanks, I missed that article.

I'm not sure about Freeney rushing the passer on every down though. I think Kirwan's point was that teams are going to force him into coverage. But I agree, if they use him like Ware and Suggs, he won't have to cover often.

It was an interesting discussion, and if I remember right Kirwan was a lot more concerned about our secondary than Frathis. Rightfully so!

[Nobody]

Frathis?

[FightLikeSin]

Frathis?

Meeney?

[Coffeedrinker]

Thanks, I missed that article.

I'm not sure about Freeney rushing the passer on every down though. I think Kirwan's point was that teams are going to force him into coverage. But I agree, if they use him like Ware and Suggs, he won't have to cover often.

It was an interesting discussion, and if I remember right Kirwan was a lot more concerned about our secondary than Frathis. Rightfully so!

Like you and 21 Superman I like Kirwan as well. Here is the thing to think about regarding Freeney (mostly) whether the O tries to spread them out or not the Colts are still going to be bringing 4 people across the LOS most of the time.

But even when Freeney is going to drop it will be covering the short zone, not trying to cover a TE or RB man-2-man. And I think Freeney has plenty of football intelligence, lower body agility and quickness to be at least adequate in covering the short zone.

[Superman]

I'm not sure about Freeney rushing the passer on every down though. I think Kirwan's point was that teams are going to force him into coverage. But I agree, if they use him like Ware and Suggs, he won't have to cover often.

The way I look at his new position is as a hybrid end, not a linebacker. Can't force him into coverage, even if you go empty backfield. We'll have coverage contingencies behind him 100% of the time. If he's ever used in coverage, it will be because the play is designed for him to cover, not because we got caught with our pants down.

I say this because that's the way the Ravens used Suggs last season, and Pagano has said Freeney will play the Suggs role. On top of that, we're not going to be a straight 3-4 defense. We're going to be a true hybrid: 3-4, 4-3, 335, 425, 245, etc. We're going to play all of that, on a lot of downs. I'm sure Pagano and Manusky will find the best way to use Freeney in every set, and make sure he's not lined up in man coverage on receivers he can't handle.

As for Mathis, I've always felt like he'd be a good fit for linebacker in a 3-4, playing whatever role he has to. I doubt he'll be in man coverage very often, especially turning and running with tight ends up the field, but I think he's better suited for that than Freeney is. And the Jarrett Johnson role, which Mathis said is his role, is kind of a Jack of all Trades type position.

Check this article out when you can. It breaks down the different variations of a couple different 3-4 defenses.

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2010/5/6/1460598/examining-lb-job-responsibilities

[TKnight24]

I have confidence in their coverage abilities. I'm sure coach Pagano, Manusky, & the LB Coach are walking them through the motions. I believe freeney and mathis will excel in this NEW Defense

[The Peytonator]

I have the utmost confidence in Dwibert Meeney's ability to cover the flat two or three times a game, as that is all the more often they will probably be asked to do such a thing.

One thing I do wonder about, moreso in Freeney's case, how much will he play on first downs? In the past he has taken a lot of downs off. In the new scheme are we gonna be seeing Hickman/Hughes playing first down OLB, and Freeney coming in on 3rd down Nickel packages?

[Gavin]

By that illustration in all honesty its not hard to force them to try to cover, when they are blitzing which obviously they will be alot all you have to do is line up in a two tight end set and get one to chip Freeney then release out for a short screen pass over Freeneys head in my opinion, now that wont make him call off the rush in all likelihood but that will go for easy yards over there head, I think they will be fine both Freeney and Mathis but I expect there sacks to go down

[Coffeedrinker]

By that illustration in all honesty its not hard to force them to try to cover, when they are blitzing which obviously they will be alot all you have to do is line up in a two tight end set and get one to chip Freeney then release out for a short screen pass over Freeneys head in my opinion, now that wont make him call off the rush in all likelihood but that will go for easy yards over there head, I think they will be fine both Freeney and Mathis but I expect there sacks to go down

Then all the D does is role a LB to the TE that is chipping Freeney and he is not open for the screen pass which will force the QB to hold the ball longer which allows Freeney and or Mathis or another dlineman to get to the QB thus making their sack numbers go up.

[Slick_Rick]

This defense is going to be really fun to watch. In the old 4-3 we knew Freeney and Mathis were coming ever down. I think the fear that both of them are coming will aid in their coverage. If they can sell well, then they can disguise their coverage to give them an advantage.

[chad72]

This defense is going to be really fun to watch. In the old 4-3 we knew Freeney and Mathis were coming ever down. I think the fear that both of them are coming will aid in their coverage. If they can sell well, then they can disguise their coverage to give them an advantage.

Most importantly, teams cannot just double team Frathis like they used to and account for every rusher if we play a 3 man front and blitz an ILB or DB. Essentially, less predictability.

Need to probably invest in at least 1 more coverage LB if possible for more coverage abilities in LB corp., IMO. Playing a 3 safety look does help with teams using multiple TEs, thus allowing us to play the 3-3-5 (3 safeties and 2 CBs in backfield) that gives a lot of flexibility, IMO. Our safeties Bethea and Lefeged are as fast as our CBs, or faster in some cases, if I am not mistaken.

[Smonroe]

Most importantly, teams cannot just double team Frathis like they used to and account for every rusher if we play a 3 man front and blitz an ILB or DB. Essentially, less predictability.

Need to probably invest in at least 1 more coverage LB if possible for more coverage abilities in LB corp., IMO. Playing a 3 safety look does help with teams using multiple TEs, thus allowing us to play the 3-3-5 (3 safeties and 2 CBs in backfield) that gives a lot of flexibility, IMO. Our safeties Bethea and Lefeged are as fast as our CBs, or faster in some cases, if I am not mistaken.

I was just going to post basically the same comment. Even though most offenses did that our D coordinator didn't adjust. We were constantly dinked and dunked with our DBs playing so far off their receivers.

I also agree that we're not there as far as the personnel needed to run a good D (in any formation), but I think I like the way we're heading. This year is about developing the offense. Hopefully next season we'll address the D.

[krunk]

They will be fine, as they won't be forced into coverage anymore than baltimores group was and that was rare.