Interesting Analysis on 2017 Colts

[VeveJones007]

Warren Sharp put together a long Twitter thread on the 2017 Colts and how bad coaching made their record worse than you would expect with even an average coaching staff.

I have a pretty unbelievable story to share regarding the 2017 Colts. This team has largely been forgotten, because they didn't have Andrew Luck & the coaching staff was fired after the season. This is a story about the consequences of horrendous decision making.

The 2017 Colts finished as the 3rd worst team in the league, per the standings, and they won only 4 games all season.

But in their 16-game season, the Colts trailed at halftime in only 6 games. They held halftime leads in 9 games. Yet they went 2-7 in games they led at halftime.

The 2017 Colts are the ONLY team in the last 27 years to lose at least 7 games which they led at halftime.

Their leads didn’t mysteriously evaporate in the 3rd quarter. The Colts led through three quarters in 9 games.

The 2017 Colts are the ONLY team in the last 20 years to hold a lead entering the 4th quarter in at least 9 games, but win no more than 4 games.

Last year, 25 of 32 teams lost no more than one game when leading entering the 4th quarter, and roughly 35% of them won every game. Six teams lost two games when entering the 4th quarter with a lead. The only team to lose more than twice was the Colts, who lost FIVE times.

Last year, a total of five teams held a lead entering the 4th quarter in exactly 9 games. Every single team posted a winning record (aside from the Colts):
• Jaguars (10 wins)
• Chiefs (10 wins)
• Falcons (10 wins)
• Chargers (9 wins)
• Colts (4 wins)

Last year, the only teams to post 4 or fewer wins on the year led after the 4th quarter in an avg of only 2.7 games (aside from the Colts):
•Browns (0 Ws, up thru 3Q in 1 gm)
•Giants (3 Ws, up thru 3Q in 4)
•Texans (4 Ws, up thru 3Q in 3)
•Colts (4 Ws, up thru 3Q in 9)

In their first 11 games of the season, the Colts led entering the 4th quarter in 8 games. The only two teams that led entering the 4th quarter more than 8 games (through 11) were the Super Bowl Champion Eagles and the Super Bowl runner-up Patriots.

Although they led entering the 4th quarter in 8 of their first 11 games, the Colts did not start the year 8-3. Instead, the Colts won only 3 of these games. They lost 5 games by blowing leads in the 4th quarter, to drop to 3-8 on the season.

The Colts led by one-score entering the 4th quarter in 6 games, but won just one of six. They were down by one-score entering the 4th quarter in 2 games and lost both. They were 1-7 in games within one-score entering the 4th quarter, despite leading 6 of these entering the 4th.

Clearly the 2017 Colts were not a great team. But terrible teams are unable to consistently build leads into halftime and into the 4th quarter, like the Colts were routinely able to do. "Something" happened in the 4th quarter to cause such disasterous results. Buckle up...

I'll interrupt to add that this type of analysis is exactly what I do on all 32 teams in my book writing process. The 2018 Football Preview book is in process, and will be out this summer. But this couldn't wait. This was just too gross to lock up for 4 more months.

We're going to get into the dirty details of 4th quarter decision making, play calls & more. This was a large factor in the reason that the Colts blew so many 4th quarter leads. I'll put all of this into an article later, to compliment this thread.

On 1D in the 4Q, if a team is in a one-score game, they run the ball 53% of the time. The Colts ran the ball 64% of the time, 3rd most in the NFL. This despite the fact that on 1D runs they recorded a 35% success rate (2.5 YPC) vs a 53% success rate (7.8 YPA) on 1D passes.

On these 4th quarter runs, Frank Gore posted just a 30% success rate. A younger, fresher Marlon Mack recorded a 57% success rate, but received 1/3rd the carries as Gore, who was worn down by taking on a lot of carries through 3 quarters.

On 1st down in the 4th quarter, when winning by 1 score, the Colts ran the ball 79% of the time and recorded a 42% success rate on these runs (2.6 YPC). However, on their 1st down passes, they recorded a 100% success rate with 22.0 YPA.

On 1st down in the 4th quarter, when winning by 1 score, the Colts used 11 personnel (3 WRs) 30% of the time. The other 70%, they were in 12 or 13 personnel (1-2 WRs). ***If they had less than 3 WRs they went 100% run*** posting 2.4 YPC and a 38% success rate.

I used asterisks there to indicate a theme. A theme of predictability. A huge key to winning in the NFL is being unpredictable. If the opponent knows your tendencies, you are waging an uphill battle. Especially if your "tendencies" are acutally 100% "tells".


How about 1st downs when losing? On 1st down in the 4th quarter, if a team is losing they pass the ball 73% of the time on avg (27% run). But the Colts went 43% run, 2nd most in the NFL. The Rams were #1, but were successful on 57% of runs. The Colts were successful on just 32%.

Lets move on to 2nd down. On 2nd down in the 4th quarter when winning, if the Colts ***did not use 11 personnel (3 WRs) they went 100% run***. These runs averaged just 1.7 YPC.

Combining 1st & 2nd down in the 4th quarter, in a one-score game, the Colts ran the ball on 34 of 40 (85%) plays with 2 or fewer WRs. They avg'd just 2.0 YPC and a 29% success rate. The only passes IND threw here was when the game was tied or trailing, never when leading.

When not using 3WRs, they used 12 personnel on 95% of their plays, the highest reate in the league. Their 85% run rate from non-11 personnel was the 3rd highest in the league.

In the 4Q when playing with a lead, the Colts were the only team in the NFL to NEVER pass unless they had 3 WRs on the field on early downs. If they had a lead & anything less than 3 WRs on the field, they ran 100% of the time. They avg'd 2.1 YPC. There was ZERO threat to pass.

Bottom line: the 2017 Colts were the most predictable early down offense in the NFL in the 4th quarter of one-score games. But just when you think it couldn't, it gets worse...

On 3rd down with a 4th quarter lead, once again the Colts were 100% run unless they were in 11 personnel (3 WRs). These runs were so predictable, the Colts posted a 0% success rate and they gained an average of 0 YPC on these runs.

Combining every down in the 4th quarter, if the Colts were leading, they went 100% run unless they lined up in 11 personnel with 3 WRs. They were the only team in the NFL to go 100% run. With such predictability, these runs gained just 1.9 YPC and recorded a 38% success rate.

4th quarter predictability led to inefficient rushing, which severely hampered the Colts ability to win those 9 games they led entering the 4th quarter. But rushing alone wasn’t the sole cause for their horrible 4th quarter results.

The Colts were the only team playing with a 4th quarter lead to throw zero passing TDs and 2+ interceptions.

In the 4th quarter when leading, the Colts pass efficiency ranked 28th in the league, with only 29% of pass plays grading as successful (avg was 43%). Outside of the Colts 40-yard line, their passing success rate dropped to 21% (avg was 44%).

Why were the Colts so bad when passing with a 4th quarter lead? First, we need to understand the Colts were primarily a 11 personnel team when passing, which means 3 WRs. When passing, they used 3 WRs approximately 79% of the time and 2 or fewer WRs 21% of the time.

The Colts were substantially more efficient when passing from 2 or fewer WR sets:
•Using 3 WRs, they were successful on 43% of passes, delivered an 82 rating and averaged 6.8 YPA.
•Using 2 or fewer WRs, they delivered a 52% success rate, with a 91 rating and 7.8 YPA.

The Colts were 1 of only 6 teams to post a sub-45% passing success rate with 3+ WRs and over-50% passing success rate with 2 or fewer WRs.

The Colts were extremely successful when passing using 2 or fewer WRs with a lead in the first 3 quarters, recording an incredibly strong 58% success rate on those passes. That rate was 8% better than the NFL average.

But for whatever reason, when leading in the 4th quarter, the Colts NEVER attempted a pass using 2 or fewer WRs. They only used 3+ WRs. And on these 3+ WR attempts, the recorded a 33% success rate, 6.9 YPA and a 46.2 rating.

The Colts were completely predictable in a number of ways in the 4th quarter. They worked against themselves. They refused to pass out of their most successful personnel groupings for passing. Their predictability led to inefficiency, which caused hard-earned leads to slip away.

When their leads slipped away, why didn’t Colts come back to win when trailing by close margins in the 4th quarter? When down one score in the 4th quarter, the NFL average is 64% pass on early downs. When they do run the ball, the NFL average is 4.5 YPC and a 49% success rate.

When down one score in the 4Q, the Colts ran the ball 10% more than avg on early downs. This would only make sense if they were phenomenal when running. But they averaged just 1.9 YPC and posted a 19% success rate. Both were the WORST of any team in the NFL.

Meanwhile, on early down passes when down one score in the 4Q, the Colts averaged a 53% success rate (well above NFL average of 47%) & a 104 passer rating (well above the NFL average of 80). Choosing to run 10% above average & sacrificing such value was extremely unwise.

The sad part is, the Colts probably didn't even realize or measure the impact of their 4th quarter play calling. It was far worse than they could have imagined. My guess is they had no idea that they NEVER passed while maintaining a 4th qtr lead without 3 WRs on the field.

They likewise probably had no idea that the only teams to enter the 4Q with a lead more often than themselves (through week 12) faced each other in this year's Super Bowl: the Eagles & Patriots.


It's unfortunate to sit back now and realize that many of these 4th quarter leads which became losses were avoidable with stronger attention to detail and a better focus on analytics.

Often time fans and media are quick to place blame on players making a mistake on the field, without realizing the play call wasn't optimal to begin with, and majority blame should shift elsewhere. Understanding responsibility for the error is essential to correcting it.

I would have saved all of this for my book, but I don't think enough people viewed the 2017 Colts in this light, and I didn't want to sit on this until the 2018 Football Preview book publishes in June. I'll put this thread into an article tonight for easier digestion.


Here's a link (http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2018/the-unbelievable-story-of-the-2017-colts)to the article he posted about the topic.

[VeveJones007]

While this focused on the offensive side of the ball, the defense really exacerbated the issue of playing with a lead. The defense was slow with no pass rush, which allowed opposing QBs to have all day to throw late in games.

[smitty46953]

Warren Sharp put together a long Twitter thread on the 2017 Colts and how bad coaching made their record worse than you would expect with even an average coaching staff.




Here's a link (http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2018/the-unbelievable-story-of-the-2017-colts)to the article he posted about the topic.

So you are saying we were predictable? LOL Funny Chuck and his crew didn't notice what most fans knew ... :cool:

[YDFL Commish]

Warren Sharp put together a long Twitter thread on the 2017 Colts and how bad coaching made their record worse than you would expect with even an average coaching staff.




Here's a link (http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2018/the-unbelievable-story-of-the-2017-colts)to the article he posted about the topic.

Why why would I believe staggeringly irrefutable facts, when I have Dammy telling me coaching doesn't matter?

[FatDT]

Coaching matters. Playcalling matters.

[HoosierinFL]

my god. I mean, we all saw this trend (except Dam) all year, but to see those stats present it so clearly, it's almost as if Pagano was throwing the games.

edit: its also why i think this roster isn't as bad as many think it is. I'm not saying it's without holes, is surely is, but many of these guys will look a lot better with coaches who actually know what they're doing.

[VeveJones007]

my god. I mean, we all saw this trend (except Dam) all year, but to see those stats present it so clearly, it's almost as if Pagano was throwing the games.

edit: its also why i think this roster isn't as bad as many think it is. I'm not saying it's without holes, is surely is, but many of these guys will look a lot better with coaches who actually know what they're doing.

Yep. Competent coaching, okay offensive line play, good quarterbacking, and some semblance of pass rush immediately makes the 2018 Colts a potential playoff team.

[1965southpaw]

Hell, even Pagano said it clearly........We JUST do what we do....over and over and over again....no creativity, no unpredictability......we follow the Proshess.....shame on all the so-called analysts who just skim the surface (Luck out = Colts suck) and didn't diagnose and report what was really happening. Maybe, just maybe if the reporting weren't so kind to this coaching staff Irsay would have moved faster to make a change. Oh well, old news. I prefer to look forward to the future.

[Pez]

I remember multiple games this year being up 10 or so at half and knowing without a doubt that it wasn't enough. I agree with hoosierInFL that our personnel is not as bad as most think.

The stat I found most interesting is the stat where our success rate passing with < 3 WRs was so much better than our pass rate with >= 3 WRs.

This is a stunning indictment of the Pagano regime / system. Everyone beside Pagano knew how predictable the Colts were.

[YDFL Commish]

This:

In the 4Q when playing with a lead, the Colts were the only team in the NFL to NEVER pass unless they had 3 WRs on the field on early downs. If they had a lead & anything less than 3 WRs on the field, they ran 100% of the time. They avg'd 2.1 YPC. There was ZERO threat to pass.

WTF! How is that even possible.

Film study by our opponents must have lasted less than hour.

Apparently the Colts were the only team in the league that didn't self-scout themselves. What a bunch of fukn bozos!

[Racehorse]

Can you post a link so I can share with my friends not on here?

[Maniac]

They did the same thing for years with Luck as well. The difference was that Luck was able to bail them out of bad long down and distance situations a lot of times which made it appear much better than the reality was.

Shitty coaching for years and years, such a waste. Did no one on Pagano's staff have the balls to show him film and stats like these and say "They know what we are doing, we are being too predictable?" Someone should have grown a pair and brought it up. Either that or someone did and Pagano's dumb ass ignored them.

I really like Reich's approach from what I read in that Peter King article, about changing things up out of formations that defenses think you are going to do one thing in, and then do another. I think if Luck is able to come back and throw as well as he previously did, we are going to be VERY happy with this offense.

[Brylok]

So you are saying we were predictable? LOL Funny Chuck and his crew didn't notice what most fans knew ... :cool:

Weren't there 3 former head coaches on Chuck's staff? Somebody had to have known.

[VeveJones007]

Can you post a link so I can share with my friends not on here?

It was a twitter thread, but he wrote up an article at the link below.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2018/the-unbelievable-story-of-the-2017-colts

[VeveJones007]

This:

WTF! How is that even possible.

Film study by our opponents must have lasted less than hour.

Apparently the Colts were the only team in the league that didn't self-scout themselves. What a bunch of fukn bozos!

It’s almost like opponents could rope-a-dope the Colts. Let them get out to a lead, then the Colts would fall into their own trap.

[Racehorse]

It’s almost like opponents could rope-a-dope the Colts. Let them get out to a lead, then the Colts would fall into their own trap.

If you show this to the resident damass, he'll just say that the reason we were able to get the lead in games was due to excellent coaching (even though coaching does not matter) only to fall when the talent level gets exposed. This article refutes that. His follow-up on the moronic coaching decisions should be enlightening to all but said damass. He'll probably trot out his alter ego apagano'sballsinhismouth to argue first and then appear days later.

[sherck]

This analysis is.......horrific. I knew that we were predicable but, by all that is holy, these numbers are horrific.

Thus supporting the concept that our talent level is not nearly as bad as was billed all year but that we ended up giving away any advantages we might have had late in the game and having those decisions overcome our talent.

I am SO looking forward to 2018.

Walk Worthy,

[Dam8610]

The one thing I always said I had a problem with in regards to the previous regime was that their playcalling was too conservative. This illustrates that. That said, I think a thing that's overlooked by the author is the late game turnovers that plagued this team. They were probably a bigger factor in the late game collapses than the playcalling. That's why I think Brissett is best suited as a backup at this point in his career, and a healthy Luck along with some improvements in free agency and the draft could have this team back in the postseason, and crazy things can happen once you're in.

[VeveJones007]

The one thing I always said I had a problem with in regards to the previous regime was that their playcalling was too conservative. This illustrates that. That said, I think a thing that's overlooked by the author is the late game turnovers that plagued this team. They were probably a bigger factor in the late game collapses than the playcalling. That's why I think Brissett is best suited as a backup at this point in his career, and a healthy Luck along with some improvements in free agency and the draft could have this team back in the postseason, and crazy things can happen once you're in.

Counterpoint: when the defense knows what’s coming, how much of those turnovers are the fault of the players?

[Dam8610]

Counterpoint: when the defense knows what’s coming, how much of those turnovers are the fault of the players?

Still a lot, because a QB always has the option to throw the ball away. It's a smarter play than throwing a pick six, if not a popular one.

[VeveJones007]

Still a lot, because a QB always has the option to throw the ball away. It's a smarter play than throwing a pick six, if not a popular one.

Sure, but it’s a hell of a lot more complicated than that. It’s also true that the coaches effectively forced a 2nd year QB to play with one arm tied behind his back. Turnovers are more likely to happen in that situation.

[Maniac]

Still a lot, because a QB always has the option to throw the ball away. It's a smarter play than throwing a pick six, if not a popular one.

If the defense knows what you're doing pretty much every down, you should just throw the ball away every down? Or do you have to try to make plays at some point?

[Dam8610]

If the defense knows what you're doing pretty much every down, you should just throw the ball away every down? Or do you have to try to make plays at some point?

So much hyperbole here I don't know where to start. First, the defense didn't know what they were going to do "pretty much every down" as you say even if the playcalling was too predictable (I'm assuming no other NFL team has instituted a Bill Belicheat/Ernie Adams style cheating system). Second, even if the defense knew the type of playcall (run or pass) that was coming on a given down, there's still such a wide variety in each subset that the defense having that information doesn't preclude the offense from making a play, especially if the offense is very good at executing their plays (how else would the Manning led Colts have ever beat the Cheaters?). Finally, I'm only advocating throwing the ball away instead of committing a costly turnover. Brissett had many opportunities to make plays, but made a lot of mistakes, sometimes unforced mental errors, sometimes bad decisions caused by pressure. That's the cost of starting a second year 24 year old QB who isn't on the pure talent level of Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck. He likely has the talent to develop into a starting caliber QB with another couple years of development, but last year, he was a big reason the team lost games late.

[omahacolt]

The one thing I always said I had a problem with in regards to the previous regime was that their playcalling was too conservative. This illustrates that. That said, I think a thing that's overlooked by the author is the late game turnovers that plagued this team. They were probably a bigger factor in the late game collapses than the playcalling. That's why I think Brissett is best suited as a backup at this point in his career, and a healthy Luck along with some improvements in free agency and the draft could have this team back in the postseason, and crazy things can happen once you're in.

You truly are a fucking idiot. And an even bigger pussy.

[omahacolt]

The only thing dam should say is “you guys were right and I was wrong. Every single bit of evidenced leads to this conclusion. Sorry dudes”

But he is a sackless, poor postured virgin pissface. He is this boards version of Donald trump. Except he can read.

[Racehorse]

Yeah, right. Keep us in stitches, will ya?

[Butter]

You know how sometimes you shit and there is that one turd that will not go down? You flush again it's still staring back at you saying come at me bruh! So you flush again, and mother fucker that piece of shit is still there! That is Dam and his Pagano love.

[Butter]

Side note, I may need to adjust my diet.

[Dam8610]

The only thing dam should say is “you guys were right and I was wrong. Every single bit of evidenced leads to this conclusion. Sorry dudes”

But he is a sackless, poor postured virgin pissface. He is this boards version of Donald trump. Except he can read.

You know how sometimes you shit and there is that one turd that will not go down? You flush again it's still staring back at you saying come at me bruh! So you flush again, and mother fucker that piece of shit is still there! That is Dam and his Pagano love.

I'm not apologizing for your collective delusion.

[Maniac]

So much hyperbole here I don't know where to start. First, the defense didn't know what they were going to do "pretty much every down" as you say even if the playcalling was too predictable (I'm assuming no other NFL team has instituted a Bill Belicheat/Ernie Adams style cheating system). Second, even if the defense knew the type of playcall (run or pass) that was coming on a given down, there's still such a wide variety in each subset that the defense having that information doesn't preclude the offense from making a play, especially if the offense is very good at executing their plays (how else would the Manning led Colts have ever beat the Cheaters?). Finally, I'm only advocating throwing the ball away instead of committing a costly turnover. Brissett had many opportunities to make plays, but made a lot of mistakes, sometimes unforced mental errors, sometimes bad decisions caused by pressure. That's the cost of starting a second year 24 year old QB who isn't on the pure talent level of Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck. He likely has the talent to develop into a starting caliber QB with another couple years of development, but last year, he was a big reason the team lost games late.

You are comparing Tom Moore's offense to what they ran under Pagano's tenure? Yeah, you're a fucking idiot.

[Coltsalr]

I'm not apologizing for your collective delusion.

“Collective delusion”

Methinks you discovered recreational drugs shortly before deciding to challenge the world to a fight.

[YDFL Commish]

You are comparing Tom Moore's offense to what they ran under Pagano's tenure? Yeah, you're a fucking idiot.

You know what, I'm firmly convinced that dammy could have this debate with Peyton fucking Manning, and dammy would still believe that he is right.

[HoosierinFL]

So much hyperbole here I don't know where to start. First, the defense didn't know what they were going to do "pretty much every down" as you say even if the playcalling was too predictable (I'm assuming no other NFL team has instituted a Bill Belicheat/Ernie Adams style cheating system). S

fucking fans sitting at home watching on tv knew what the colts were doing on every down in the 4th quarter. You think professionals who have spent a week scouting and watching film on the colts didn't also see it? You think you have to cheat in order to predict what other teams do? And when you're most predictable team in the entire league....

[Dam8610]

You are comparing Tom Moore's offense to what they ran under Pagano's tenure? Yeah, you're a fucking idiot.

No, I was stating that execution based offenses exist (they have since at least Lombardi) and that the Manning led Colts had to use that style of offense to beat the Cheaters because of their method of cheating. As far as last year's offense, my point was you were speaking in hyperbole. It's not like he was under pressure on every dropback, which seemed to be what you were saying.

[Dam8610]

“Collective delusion”

Methinks you discovered recreational drugs shortly before deciding to challenge the world to a fight.

You all assigned the attribute of "Pagano love" to me, and I have no idea how or why this happened. Turns out, he was probably an average coach who was bad at playcalling and had a young QB who was prone to mistakes late in games, at least that's what this data suggests. You know, what I said all along, that he'd be fine with an OC like Moore to run the offense.

[Butter]

Dam, Trump could use you to help him spin shit.

[omahacolt]

You all assigned the attribute of "Pagano love" to me, and I have no idea how or why this happened. Turns out, he was probably an average coach who was bad at playcalling and had a young QB who was prone to mistakes late in games, at least that's what this data suggests. You know, what I said all along, that he'd be fine with an OC like Moore to run the offense.

He is the worst coach that was ever given a whistle. If you were a man you would admit this.

[Racehorse]

You all assigned the attribute of "Pagano love" to me, and I have no idea how or why this happened. Turns out, he was probably an average coach who was bad at playcalling and had a young QB who was prone to mistakes late in games, at least that's what this data suggests. You know, what I said all along, that he'd be fine with an OC like Moore to run the offense.

If he had Moore and Manning, he would have them hand the ball off to Addai on first and second down and then throw to Gonzalez on third and long, ignoring Marvin and Reggie, who they would have running go routes thirty yards downfield.

[Hoopsdoc]

That’s just....incredible. And it’s what us Colts fans were saying all year(well, minus Dam).

How can one assemble a staff with that little self awareness? I mean, I feel sorry for Frank Gore. They were running him into defenses that KNEW he was coming every time.

[VeveJones007]

Bump.

When thinking about Brissett's potential improvement from 2017, it makes me think of this analysis from Warren Sharp last year. Even that 2017 team could have won 6-7 games with slightly better coaching. With a better roster, this may be more of an 8-10 win team than the 6-7 wins I predicted yesterday.

[Pez]

Good bump, this was a great read last year. I posted in another thread. Grigson, Pep and Chuck are ultimately what made Luck retire.

[Oldcolt]

Good bump, this was a great read last year. I posted in another thread. Grigson, Pep and Chuck are ultimately what made Luck retire.

Agreed but would add that Luck bears some responsibility because of how he threw his body around up until last year. Lest we forget, if the guy had bought into sliding he would not have had to deal with a lacerated kidney at a minimum and who know what else. People were telling him constantly, in real time, to stop taking those hits. Again agreed that 90% was do to such a shitty offensive line and game plan that he felt he had to do everything himself. Just a terrible waste, especially for Luck. He should have been the GOAT of his generation.

[ChoppedWood]

Bump.

When thinking about Brissett's potential improvement from 2017, it makes me think of this analysis from Warren Sharp last year. Even that 2017 team could have won 6-7 games with slightly better coaching. With a better roster, this may be more of an 8-10 win team than the 6-7 wins I predicted yesterday.

Not sure who it was but this exact thing was being discussed on the drive in this morning. I forgot just how many games we took leads into the late 3rd and 4th quarter that year. We had the worst coaching staff in the history of the sport and not a very deep team, result, a lot of late losses. We have neither of the 2 this year, I expect we'll see some of the opposite this year with us gutting out a few come from behinds. Feel pretty solid on no worse than 10-6 this campaign.